i' 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


A 


^ 


"V 


7y 


1.0 


I.I 


-1^    |2.5 

u    liiS 

1^   Kfi    IIIIIM 


1.8 


1.25      1.4   iiji/s 

«M 6"      

► 

^ 


# 


>• 


^.4 


f 


'/ 


Hiotographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


«v 


,v 


fv 


^ 


». 


23  WIST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


^ 


HI 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CSHM/ICIVIH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I     I    Covers  damaged/ 


□ 


Couverture  endommag6e 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurte  et/ou  pellicul6e 


I      I   Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


□   Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  giographiques  en  couleur 

□   Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

r~|   Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


n 


a 


n 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
ReilA  avec  d'autres  documents 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  raliure  serr6e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutAes 
tors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  Atait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  M  fiimies. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplAmentaires: 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  iui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  di^taiis 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  methods  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu6s  ci-dessous. 


D 

D 
D 

D 


V 


D 
D 
D 
D 


Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couhur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurAes  et/ou  peiiicuiies 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d^colortes,  tachet^es  ou  piqu6es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d6tach6es 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Qualitv  of  print  varies/ 
Quality  in6gale  de  I'impresoion 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplAmentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Mition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  erratn 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possiblo  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmies  A  nouv^au  de  fa^on  A 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


Th 
to 


Tl 

P< 
o1 
fil 


Oi 

b( 
th 
sii 
ol 
fil 

SJi 
Ol 


Tl 
si 

Tl 
w 

IVI 
di 
er 
b( 

"1 
re 
m 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film*  au  taux  de  rMuction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


J 


26X 


»X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


9ils 

du 

difier 

jne 

lage 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

National  Library  of  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  b^ck  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grdce  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

Bibliothdque  nationale  du  Canada 


Las  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  film^^  et  en 
conformity  avec  ies  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimde  sont  film^s  en  commen^ant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
durnidre  page  qui  comporte  une  e?   preinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film^s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreintn 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  iaCt  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — ^>  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED'),  or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbols  y  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  la'ge  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc..  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diff6rents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  {'angle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


ratn 

9 


lelure, 
I  A 


3 


32X 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

I 

5 

6 

AWFUL  EXPOSURE 


or 


THE    ATROCIOUS    PLOT 


FORMED   BY 


CERTAIN    INDIVIDUATES 


AfiArX.ST  TIIR 

CLERGY  AND  NUNS  OF  LOWER  CANADA, 

THROUGH   TIIK   INTERVENTION    OP 

MARIA  MONK. 

WITH  AN  AUTIIBNTIC  NARRATIVE  OK  HER  MFK,   FRO:.t  HER  BIRTH  TO  THE 
PRESENT  XOMENT   AND  AN  ACCOUNT  OF  HER  IMPO3ITI0N8,  ETC. 


Aurl  parra  fames  quid  iion  mortalitp  pectora  cogis  I ! 


i\E]V.YORK: 
PRlNTF.n  FUP  JONES  &  CO.  OF  MONTREAL. 


I 


1 5 1 4  0 1 


Entered,  according  to  the  act  of  Congress,  In  the  year  1836, 
by  S.  Adams,  in  the  Clerk's  ollice  oi'tlic  District  Court  of  the 
Southern  District  of  New- York. 


t 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  Pamphlet  of  the  "  Awlul  I>l5«/<J/ tU^ 
is  trifling  in  bulk,  but  charged  wit    fqAi^ittfci, 
malignity  and  clumsy  misreprt .  eni/^w>/|f     't/i  ^ 
object  of  it  is  no  less  than  to  iniiict  niCb'KV'%Hc 
injury  on  the  reputation  and  etiicietic\  pf  lit^ 
ministers  of  the  Roman  Catholic  iaitli  i;.  L^v/ifi 
Canada,   and    on    the    hitlierto    unblei.iis/li^'L 
fame  of  the  Conventual  institutions  oi'  thcti  ;  ig> 
vince.     Let  it  be  admitted  that  sucli  a  w  t-j .. 
might  be  undertaken  with  a  conscientious  per- 
suasion of  its  justice -and  necessity,  the  public 
would  still  look  for  and  expect  to  find  strong 
and  unquestionable  evidence  in  justification  of 
the  act  of  the  accusers.     If  that  evidence  were 
really  produced,  it  would  indeed  be  difficult  to 
over-estimate  the  importance  -  f  the  question  be- 
tween Maria  Monk  and  her  supporters  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  Catholic  clergy  and  religi- 
ous establishments  of  Lower  Canada  on  the 
other.      If   inquiry  should    substantiate   and 
prove  the  charges  against  these  latter,  it  would 
then  become  a  question  whether  piety,  charity, 
humility,  or  Christian   virtue,   had  any  real 
abiding  place  upon  earth.   For  it  would  follow, 
that  men  visibly  engaged  through  a  long  course 


INTRUDIC  TIOX, 


of  years  in  tlir  active  (liscfiar""^  oftlio  wo^X  sa- 
cred fuiictions,  may  nevertheless  he  stained  by 
the  Ijahitiial  ijiduls-.-nce  of  the  blackest  crimes  ; 
and  that  wovnen,  whose  vows  consecrate  them 
to   the   j-ervice^of  (jJod,  and   who  fulfil  those 
vows  in  works  of  mercy  to  (jJod's  creatures,  may 
at  the  same   time  be  plmig-ed  deep  in  revolting 
sensuality.    Individu.il  liypocrisy  may  be  allow- 
ed and  credited  without  seriously  affecting  our 
belief  in  human  virtue  ;  but  hypociisy  so  ex- 
terisiv'^'  as  that  charsred  in  the  work  we  are 
corlsi'dering,    if  proved   and   luiveiled,   would 
shake  to  the  very  foundation  our  faith  in  the 
existence  of  relig-ion  and  morality.     Tlie  very 
nature  of  tliat  hypocrisy  is  in  itself  monstrous 
and  appalling.     You  who  have  recid  the  "  Aw- 
ful Disclosures,"  look  at  the  picture  Avhich  is 
presented  to  your  understandings !     Contem- 
plate the  demand  which  is  made  on  your  cre- 
dulity !     Mark  that  aged  woman  watching  over 
the  bed  of  the  pestilential  and  the  dying,  mark 
her  fearless  intrepidity,  her  self-abnegation,  and 
her  merciful  ministrations  !       See  !  her  hand 
smooths  the  pillow  of  that  tossed  and  troubled 
man,  she  carries  to  his  lips  the  reposing  draught, 
he  sleeps  !     Now  see  if  you  can — if  your  vision 
will  admit  the  picture,  if  your  understanding 
will  admit  the  belief,  that  same  woman,  in  the 
broad  glare  of  the  next  day's  sun,  doing  a  deed 
of  Murder!     Mark  that  man  in   the  habili 
ments  of  a  servant  of  God !     Where  is  he  ? 
What  does  he  I     He  stands  at  the  side  of  the 
plague-strickeuj  he  administers  the  last  rites  of 


1 


% 


IxN'TRODUCTION. 


Religion — he  prays,  and  his  words  carry  hope 
and  consolation  to  the  dying.  Again,  look  and 
behold  that  identical  being  treading  with  stealthy 
pace  his  way  to  the  commission  of  hideous  de- 
bauchery within  the  precincts  of  an  Hospital. 
There  is  no  exaa^iJ:eration  in  these  contrasts. 
The  duties  of  the  nuns  and  priests  have  been 
and  are  such  as  we  have  ascribed  to  them. — 
Now  we  ask  the  ten  thousand  readers  of  the 
book,  if  the  deeds  therein  alleged  are  not  incom- 
patible with  human  nature, — if  any  thing  that 
is  known  of  man's  capacity  for  crime  can  ren- 
der them  credible  ?  Scrutinize  the  annals  of 
vice,  and  where  will  be  found  any  thing  ap- 
proaching the  horrors  imputed  in  the  "  Disclo- 
sures," to  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy  and  orders 
of  Lower  Canada  ?  Protestant  historians,  in 
dwelling  on  the  enormities  oi  the  Catholics  in 
the  worst  of  times,  have  never  charged  them  with 
the  turpitudes  related  in  this  book.  Luther,  the 
violent  and  ruthless  Luther,  in  justification  of  his 
attacks  on  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  never 
urged  the  existence  of  corruption  so  horrible. 
Tiiis  remark  applies  with  still  greater  force  to 
his  fellow-laborers  and  successors.  At  the  close 
of  the  last  century,  and  in  enervated  Italy,  the 
Grand  Duke  ot  Tuscany  ordered  an  inquiry 
into  the  state  of  the  religious  establishments 
within  his  dominions ;  and  the  result  of  the  in- 
quiry was,  that  reform  was  judged  necessary. 
Ricci,  bishop  of  Pistoia,  was  appointed  by  his 
sovereign  to  conduct  and  bring  to  a  termination 
that  reform.    The  life  of  Ricci  has  been  writ- 

a2 


O  INTRO  DUCT  I  OK. 

ten  by  an  acute  liistorian,  and  in  no  friendly 
spirit  to  the  church  of  Rome.  It  was  consider- 
ed that  in  that  work  the  worst  was  said,  and  the 
worst  was  proved,  that  could  be  advanced  against 
the  Conventual  sy stern.  The  debased  civiliza- 
tion of  the  country  where  the  reform  was  under- 
taken, opposed  but  a  feeble  barrier  to  the  prac- 
tice of  vice  in  every  condition  and  class  of  socie- 
ty, and  it  was  not  surprising  that  some  corrup- 
tion should  have  penetrated  into  the  holiest 
sanctuaries.  The  existence  of  the  corruption 
was  however  known  to  the  Tuscans  previously 
to  the  legal  inquiry.  They  cared  not  for  it,  nor 
murmured  against  it.  How  different  is  the  case 
with  Canada !  Its  population,  seated  in  a  region 
of  snow  and  ice,  is  primitive,  moral,  and  strictly 
religious.  The  people  neither  know  of  nor  sus- 
pect the  existence  of  corruption  among  their 
priests.  The  few  convents  in  the  country  are 
in  the  nature  of  seminaries  for  the  instruction 
of  youth,  and  asylums  for  the  poor  and  wretch- 
ed. There  are  noriC  others.  In  Tuscany,  the 
convents  which  were  found  to  require  reform, 
were  close  convents  ;  that  is  to  say,  their  inmates 
never  came  in  contact  with  the  people,  either  as 
nurses  to  the  sick,  teachers  of  youth,  or  minis- 
trators  of  the  helpless.  But,  notwithstanding 
these  differences  more  favorable  to  the  existence 
of  corruption  in  one  case  than  in  the  other,  the 
deeds  alleged  in  the  life  of  Ricci  must  appear 
comparatively  innocent  to  the  believer  in  the 
enormities  detailed  by  the  writer  of  "  Passages 
in  the  Life  of  Maria  Monk."    Is  there  such  a 


1N'»^R0DUCT10N. 


man  ?  We  know  not ;  but  if  there  is,  he  must 
be  possessed  of  a  mind  capable  of  dweUing  on 
the  possible  blood-thirstiness  of  a  William  Penn, 
or  the  possible  misanthrophy  of  a  Howard. 

Turn  we  now  to  the  supporters  of  this  work, 
and  let  us  ask,  where  is  the  evidence  in  justi- 
fication of  the  unheard  of  charges  they  have 
brought?  Let  them  point  to  it.  Will  they 
have  the  hardihood  to  pretend  that  the  testimo- 
ny of  an  unhappy  female,  recently  imprisoned 
for  theft,  and  still  more  recently  the  inmate  of 
an  Asylum  for  repentant  sinners,  will  serve  such 
purpose  ?  Does  the  corroboration  of  a  man  re- 
pudiated by  his  class  for  dishonesty  and  pecula- 
tion- -the  paramour  of  their  wretched  protege — 
does  it  give  assurance  of  their  conscientious 
persuasion?  Is  it  even  true  that  they  have 
produced  the  evidence  of  the  thief  and  prosti- 
tute ?  Is  the  book  which  bears  her  name,  really 
written  by  Maria  Monk  l  Impossible,  for  she 
is  in  fa^i.  and  by  her  own  confession,  an  igno- 
rant ana  uneducated  girl.  It  cannot  be  receiv- 
ed as  her  own  evidence,  although  produced  in 
her  name.  It  may  be  alleged  that  all  the  mate- 
rials were  obtained  from  her  own  lips,  and  that 
the  editor  or  editors  have  merely  arranged  for 
the  public  eye  the  matter  she  supplied.  In 
thsit  case  they  have  been  guilty  of  tampering 
with  the  evidence,  a  misdemeanor  for  which 
there  is  no  excuse  nor  palliation.  We  again 
refer  to  the  life  of  Ricci  as  an  unexceptionable 
model  in  this  respect.  There  the  minutes  of 
all  the  examinations  which  occurred  in  the 


8 


INTRODUCTION. 


course  oi  Ricci's  inquiry,  with  day  and  date,  and 
names  of  witnesses  and  of  parties,  are  minutely 
set  down.  In  the  "  Awful  Disclosures,"  there 
is  not  a  single  date  from  the  commencement 
to  the  end !  The  work  announces  a  disgusting 
alUance  between  false  Christianity  and  female 
profligacy  of  the  worst  description.  In  Canada, 
this  attempt  to  unite  the  ravings,  puerilities,  and 
loathsome  fabrications  of  a  disturbed  intellect 
Avitii  the  ends  of  piety  and  religion,  was  received 
with  nothing  but  contempt  ;  but  in  the  United 
States  the  work  has,  as  we  are  told,  gone  through 
two  editions  of  ten  thousand  copies  each,  and 
has  been  circulated  by  the  zeal  of  fanatical  and 
interested  propagandists  throughout  the  entire 
land.  It  has  even  been  publicly  recommended 
from  the  pulpit  as  an  antidote  to  the  "  errors  of 
Popery;"  and  the  heroine  has  been  honored  by 
reports  of  hair-breadth  escapes  and  of  defeated 
conspiracies  for  her  abduction. 

We  would  fain  have  believed  that  religious 
fanaticism,  in  its  more  odious  form  of  gross  ca- 
lumny and  pernicious  hatred,  had  nearly  depart- 
ed from  the  civilized  world  ;  but  the  reception 
given  to  the  "  Awful  Disclosures "  of  Maria 
Monk  shows  that  it  still  has  an  extended  habi- 
tation in  a  country  claiming  to  be  pre-eminently 
enlightened,  and  that  in  that  country  it  may  one 
day  become  the  stirrer  of  intestine  trouble,  ra- 
pine, and  bloodshed.  There,  the  very  men  who 
abjure  the  interference  of  the  civil  power  to 
procure  conformity  to  their  sectarian  faith,  do 
not  hesitate  to  resort  to  private  persecution,  se- 


INTRODUCTION 


9 


cret  intrigue,  and  the  rash  and  culpable  adoption 
of  idle  and  flimsily  constructed  stories,  to  attain 
their  ends.  The  principle  is  in  both  cases  the 
same,  although  differently  manifested.  It  will 
be  in  vain  for  the  supporters  of  Monk  to  protest 
the  sincerity  of  their  belief  in  her  pretended 
narrative. — The  question,  why  believe?  still 
remains  unsatisfied.  Have  they  anticipated  the 
question  I  They  have  not.  Are  they  looking 
about  for  evidence  to  sustain  their  pre-judgment  ? 
They  notoriously  are.  and  in  this  consists  the 
infamy  of  their  conduct.  We  are  right  in  des- 
cribing as  infamous  the  conduct  of  men,  whe- 
ther lay  or  clerical,  who  have  come  before  the 
world  and  preferred  the  most  atrocious  charges, 
in  the  hope  or  expectation  that  subsequent 
events  might  demonstrate  them  to  be  true,  or 
that  they  might  with  their  sanction  pass  with 
the  mass  without  further  examination.  To  be- 
lieve things  that  are  not,  and  cannot  be,  is  a 
chapter  in  the  history  of  man  :  whether  his 
credulity  has  been  rightly  calculated  upon  in 
the  case  before  us,  we  have  no  opportunity  of 
determining  ;  but  much  has  been  done  to  influ- 
ence him,  and  men  of  a  sacred  calling  have  sa- 
crilegiously abused  their  opportunities,  and  pre- 
sented from  the  altar  of  God  the  poison  to  his 
lips,  gilded  with  a  blasphemous  application  of 
the  language  of  the  Holy  Writ. 

We  should  have  supposed  a  priori  that  the 
marked  inconsistencies  of  this  scandalous  work 
would  have  sufficed  to  render  its  effects  on  most 
readers  comparatively  innocuous ;  we  hoped  at 


I 


10 


INTRODUCTION. 


least  that  it  would  speedily  have  sunk  into  ob- 
livion, and  have  been  allowed  to  rot,  forgotten 
amidst  the  mass  of  falsehood  and  impurity 
which  disgraces  a  portion  ol  the  New-York 
press;  hut  it  would  seem,  from  the  notices  which 
appear  from  time  to  time  in  the  periodicals,  that 
it  is  determined  to  persist  in  the  system  of  false- 
hood so  shamefully  commenced.  A  reply  has 
been  deemed  necessary. 

It  is  here  offered  with  a  feeling  of  deep  regret 
on  the  part  of  the  author,  that  the  tissue  of  hor- 
rors which  calls  ii;  forth  should  have  ever  been 
thought  or  printed.  It  will  be  necessary  to 
place  before  the  public  gaze  persons  whose  ha- 
bits and  inclinations  especially  fit  them  for  retire- 
ment, and  who  might  reasoucibly  have  expected 
to  have  walked  though  life  in  the  peaceful  and 
undisturbed  discharge  of  their  pious  avocations. 
The  necessity  of  invading  the  privacy  of  the 
good,  the  charitable,  and  the  humble,  weighed 
strongly  with  the  author  as  an  objection  to  ma- 
king any  reply  whatever  to  the  ^^  Awful  Disclo- 
sures of  Maria  Monk;  "  but  the  opmion  of  wise 
and  reflecting  men,  that  they  should  no  longer 
be  suffered  to  remain  uncontradicted  before  the 
world,  has  prevailed.  It  only  remains  to  add, 
that  the  reply  here  presented  is  complete,  that  it 
is  sustained  by  authenticated  documents  and  in- 
disputable evidence  ;  and  that  nothing  will  be 
advanced  in  the  text,  the  truth  of  which  has 
not  been  ascertained  by  careful  investigation 
and  personal  observation.  Is  it  too  much  to 
hope  that  this  refutation  of  the  "Awful  Disclp- 


INTRODUCTION. 


11 


sures"  will  be  favorably  received  by  a  generous 
and  iiscernino-  public,— generous,  we  trust,  in 
behalf  ot'calumiiiated  innocence,  and  discerning 
between  truth  and  falsehood. 


:ii 


.^k 


. 


CHAPTER  i 

A  hief  accou?it  of  the  Cmivmtual  Eslahlishments  of  the  City  of  Mem' 
treal. 


Congregation  de  Notre-Dame. 

This  institution  was  founded  in  the  seventeenth 
cpntury,  by  Margaret  Bourgeois,  born  at  Troyes  in 
Champaign.  In  her  thirty-third  year  she  aban- 
doned her  native  country,  and  arrived  at  Montreal 
in  the  year  1653.  Her  Ufe  appears  to  have  been 
marked  by  those  acts  which  immortalize  the  friends 
of  humanity.  Her  historian  thus  describes  the 
scene  of  her  labours.  "  Fifty  houses,  dispersed 
here  and  there,  v;ithin  the  limits  of  a  fort  defended 
by  stakes,  composed  the  settlement.  Their  inha- 
bitants, together  with  a  few  families,  French  and  In- 
dian, scattered  over  the  neighbouring  country,  com- 
posed the  entire  population.  It  was  the  daily  prac- 
tice of  Sister  Bourgeois  to  visit  almost  every  house 
within  and  without  the  fort.  Her  ordinary  occupa- 
tions consisted  in  attending  the  sick,  consoling  the 
afflicted,  instructing  the  ignorant,  in  washing  and 
mending  for  the  helpless,  and  in  burying  the  dead." 
At  the  expiration  of  five  years  thus  spent,  the  sister 
returned  to  France  in  search  of  companions  to  a 
toil  which  became  too  great  to  be  properly  dis- 
charged by  a  single  person.  She  arrived  a  second 
time  at  Montreal,  in  September,  1659,  and,  with 
her  companions,  was  accommodated  with  a  stable, 
the  only  dwelling  in  which  the  missionaries  could 
obtain  rest  from  the  fatigues  of  their  journey.  In 
that  stable,  and  on  the  25th  of  November,  1659, 


was  opened  the  first  school  established  in  the  city 
of  Montreal.  The  day  is  still  annually  cominemo- 
rated.  Many  years  elapsed  before  the  congrega- 
tion became  possessed  of  the  soil  on  which  the 
convent  is  now  erected  ;  but  in  1698  we  find  the 
sisters,  alrc'idy  numerous,  established  within  tlK)ir 
present  hniils.  In  the  same  year  they  received 
from  the  hands  of  the  Bishop  the  rules  of  their 
foundation,  which  have  not  since  been  altered  ;  and 
also  made  in  his  presence  the  simple  vows  of 
poverty,  chastity,  obedience,  and  of  instruction  of 
persons  of  their  own  sex,  together  with  the  vow  of 
sta')ility  in  their  profession. 

Hotel  Dieu, — This  in'='<  itution  was  founded  in 
1644,  by  the  Duchess  of  Bouillon.  Her  immedi- 
ate representative  in  Canada  was  Jane  Manse,  who 
administered  during  her  lifetime  the  "  property  of 
the  poor'*  in  the  hospital  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  of 
Montreal.  The  following  extract  from  the  Memo- 
randa of  an  American  traveller,  who  visited  the 
Hotel  Dieu  in  18'25,  describes,  in  eloquent  language, 
the  occupations  of  the  nuns.  "  We  were  shown 
the  Hospital,  which  contains  a  Laboratory,  Dis- 
pensary, and  two  large  halls  for  the  sick.  In  the 
first  room  the  nuns  were  preparing  medicines, 
making  extracts,  decoctions,  essences,  and  all  that 
the  apothecary  could  find  a  name  for ;  which  were 
afterwards  placed  in  the  Dispensary  in  the  neatest 
manner  ;  and  this  room  niade  a  fine  appearance,  al- 
though there  were  no  blue  or  yellow  waters,  which 
make  so  great  a  show  in  our  apothecary  shops 
when  seen  through  glass  vessels  of  exquisite  cJear- 
nc^ss.  The  hall  for  male  patients  was  on  the  ground 
floor  ;  and,  notwithstanding  it  was  excessively  warm 
in  the  streets  that  day  (July  16th,  1825),  yet,  be- 


sat 


8 


tween  these  massy  walls  of  stone  and  lime  thei*e 
was  a  refreshing  cooine«s  ;  the  change  of  tempera- 
ture was  felt  the  instant  we  entered  the  room.  Here 
these  delicate  women  were  seen  exercising  the  skill 
of  a  physician,  and  the  tenderness  and  patience  of 
a  mother  or  wife  at  a  sick  bed  ;  and  these  charities 
and  this  tenderness  were  bestowed,  not  upon  kindred 
and  friends,  but  upon  humble  beings,  unknown  to 
these  Sisters  of  Cliarity  before  mistoriunes  and  dis- 
ease had  come  upon  them.  Some  of  these  wretch- 
ed beings  would  have  perished  without  such  suc- 
cour. Humble  as  they  were,  there  were  no  hirelings 
about  their  pillows— no  anodynes  were  administer- 
ed to  them,  that  their  nurses  might  enjoy  unbroken 
slumbers ;  but  every  attention  which  wealth  and 
affection  could  command  in  a  populous  city,  was 
found  here.  The  feni.ile  apartment  for  the  sick 
was,  if  possible,  still  more  convenient.  There  was 
an  ail  of  taste  and  comfort  about  every  thing  in 
this  room,  v/hich  seemed  to  half  cure  disease  at  the 
first  look  of  the  means  to  do  it.  It  often  happens, 
such  are  the  accommodations  for  the  sick  here, 
that  others  than  the  poor  and  destitute  come  here 
to  be  healed,  and  leave  the  place,  if  not  under 
pecuniary  obligations,  at  least  with  a  deep  sense  of 
gratitude  for  kind  offices.  I  noticed  one  young 
woman  lying  on  her  bed,  whom  the  nuns  approach- 
ed with  great  affection  and  kindness,  bringing 
every  little  delicacy  to  tempt  a  sickly  appetite ; 
now  and  then  a  small  cup  of  cooling  beverage,  to 
moisten  her  parched  lips ;  and  the  nuns,  as  they 
sat  by  her  side  or  passed  along  on  duty,  often,  in 
gentle  tones,  let  fall  sweet  words  of  consolation  to 
the  sufferer.  Even  the  soft  western  breeze,  so  re- 
viving in  that  excessive  heat,  was  not  allowed  to 


visit  her  directly,  but  its  current  was  breken  by  a 
screen,  round  which  the  air  was  wafted  ott  the 
balmy  wings  of  love  and  healing,  i  learnt  that 
this  fair  invalid  had  been  there  twice  before,  and 
had,  in  a  good  measure,  recovered ;  but  it  was  all 
over  with  her  now.  The  death  tones  of  her  voice — 
the  preternatural  illuminations  of  her  eyes — the 
steadfast  gaze— the  sudden  change  to  a  quick 
twinkling  of  those  orbs  from  that  fixed  look — and, 
added  to  all,  that  saintly  smile  which  was  frequent- 
ly seen  on  her  lip  at  every  kindness,  were  to  my 
mind  irresistible  proofs  that  her  dissolution  was 
near;  and  it  required  but  little  imagination  at  that 
moment  to  think  that  some  angel  was  then  whis- 
pering 

"  Sister  spirit,  como  away." 

Every  thing  in  this  institution  was  active,  yet 
composed  ;  all  were  busy ;  but  there  was  no  bustling. 
Religion  and  Chanty,  hand  in  hand,  were  walking 
their  rounds  of  duty.  There  were  no  repining 
beauties  here,  under  thick  veils,  breathing  half- 
smothered  curses  at  parental  cruelty.  Nothing  but 
the  sanctity  of  the  place  to  remind  one  of  the 
Paraclete,  nor  of 

— '  Those  deep  solitudes,  and  awful  cells, .  ^ 

Wliere  pleasing,  heavenly  conleraplation  dwells, 
And  ever-musing  melancholy  reigns.' 

The  costume  of  these  nuns  is  one  of  ease,  and  not 
destitute  of  grace.  The  large  sleeves  in  any  fe- 
male dress  is  generally  becoming,  and  almost  every 
dress  is  graceful  in  which  perfect  neatness  is  a 
striking  feature." 

It  is  pleasing  to  be  able  to  turn  from  the  atra 


T 


hilarious  inventions  of  madmen  and  fanatics  to  the 
dignified  and  merited  eulogium  of  a  liberal  and  well 
informed  mind. 

General  Hospital. — This  institution  was  founded 
in  1753  by  Madame  de  Youville,  as  a  refuge  for  the 
infirm,  poor,  and  invalids.  It  has  also  a  depart- 
ment for  patients  labouring  undc-r  mental  derange- 
ment, and  another  for  foundlings. 

The  revenues  of  the  three  foundations  are  ex- 
pended for  their  appropriate  objects.  The  vene- 
ration with  which  they  are  regarded  by  the  people, 
Protestant  and  vJatholic,  proceeds  from  the  charities 
they  exercise,  and  which  can  neither  be  disguised 
nor  simulated. 


CHAPTER  II. 

Misreprcsentalions  ccn'ainsd  in  the  "  Awful  Disclosures,''^  concern' 
ing  the  discipline  and  internal  management  of  tlie  Convents, 

The  very  points  on  which  information  may  most 
easily  be  obtained  by  I's,  stranger  or  by  the  inquiring 
traveller,  are  in  part  ignorantly,  and  in  pitrt  wilful- 
ly misrepresented  in  this  "  artless"  production.  The 
names,  occupations,  and  holdiug  in  the  public  esti- 
mation of  the  sisterhood  of  the  three  Convents,  are 
in  most  instances  either  malignantly  distorted  or 
stupidly  confounded.  Intelligent  readers  are  afflict- 
ed with  a  stubborn  and  iKconvenient  habit  of  in- 
quiring into  statements  of  every  description,  whether 
of  great  or  apparently  small  importance.  It  will 
appear  in  the  course  of  this  refutation  why  it  was 
impossible  for  the  pseudo-writer  of  the  "  Awful  Dis- 
c^iosures"    to  have  furnished    correct   information 

1* 


6 


concerninpj  the  discipline  of  the  con  vents.  In  the 
meantime  we  shall  point  out  a  few  of  the  errors  of 
detail,  with  which  the  pamphlet  abounds. 

Speaking  of  the  nuns  of  the  Congregational 
Nunnery,  it  is  stated  that  they  are  sometimes  called 
"  Sisters  of  Charity."  This  is  not  true.  The  order 
of  the  "  Sisters  of  Charity  "  has  no  existence  in 
Canada,  and  the  only  name,  either  in  French  or 
English,  by  which  the  nuns  of  the  Congregational 
Nunnery  are  collectively  distinguished,  is,  "  Sisters 
of  the  Congregation!" 

It  is  stated  that  some  of  the  nuns  belonging  to 
the  Congregational  Nunnery  "  arc  established  as 
instructresses  in  difierent  parts  of  the  United  States.'* 
This  is  not  true.  There  are  not,  and  never  have 
been,  instructresses  from  that  convent  sent  to  any 
part  of  the  United  States.  The  rules  of  the  foun- 
dation expres  "ly  limit  the  labours  of  the  sisterhood 
to  Canada. 

The  account  given  of  the  instruction  afforded  to 
pupils  in  the  Congregational  Nunnery  is  false  ;  it 
is  not  even  sustained  by  plausible  allegations.  It 
is  true  that  the  education  bestowed  in  that  esta- 
blishment is  not  brilliant,  and  that  the  accomplish- 
ments which  a  state  of  society  differing  from  that 
of  Canada  requires,  are  not  there  cultivated ;  but 
on  the  other  hand,  it  is  undeniable  that  the  branches 
which  help  to  make  the  notable  woman,  that  best 
ornament  of  domestic  life,  arc  carefully  attended  to. 
The  moral  and  religious  instruction  of  the  pu-pils  is 
a  chief  object,  and  their  parents  are  grateful  and 
satisfied.  We  must  not  be  misunderstood  when 
we  say  the  education  is  iiot  brilliant ;  it  is  elegant 
and  refined,  and  will  not  suffer,  in  this  respect,  by 
comparison  with  any  modern  boarding-school ;  but 


I 


chemistry  is,  \vc  arc  afraid,  sadly  neglected,  and 
conchology  held  in  light  esteem.  It  is  stated,  that 
the  nuns  had  no  very  regular  parts  assigned  them 
in  the  management  of  the  "  Schools."  Assuming 
that  this  refers  to  the  Congregational  School,  it  is 
false.  Regularity,  in  all  thingwS,  is  the  soul  of  Con- 
ventual establishments,  and  could  not  be  neglected 
in  the  instance  mentioned,  without  great  pubUc 
scandal.  It  is  alleged  that  "  the  nuns  were  rather 
rough  and  unpolished  in  their  manners."  Rough- 
ness is  not  characteris  'c  of  Fren-ch  Canadians  in 
any  situation  of  life ;  moreover,  as  inmates  of  con- 
vents, the  natural  disposition  of  Canadian  females 
is  assisted  by  the  sanction  of  religion  and  of  religi- 
ous rule.  Of  the  polish  of  the  sisterhood  it  does 
not  appear  that  the  author  of  the  "  Disclosures" 
was  capable  of  forming  an  opinion.  It  is  alleged 
that  they  (the  nuns)  would  often  exclaim,  "  c'est  un 
menti,"  (that's  a  lie,)  and  "  mon  Dieu"  (my  God,) 
on  the  most  trivial  occasions.  Respecting  the 
lirst  expression,  it  must  have  escaped  the  learned 
correctors  for  the  press,  that  "  c'est  un  menti,"  is  not 
the  PVench  for  "that's  a  lie,"  or  for  any  thing 
dse  : — "  mon  dieu"  is  an  habitual  expression  with 
the  French  women,  who  do  not  attach  to  it  the  so- 
lemii  meaning  ©f  the  English  vertsioH.  This  im- 
pertinent and  foolish  opinion  on  the  labours  of  th€ 
sisterhood  of  the  Congregational  Nunnery  in  the 
instruction  ©f  youth,  is  not  creditable  to  the  skill 
of  the  authors  of  the  "Disclosures."  Their  "  Dis- 
closures" are  often  more  than  hazardous.  They 
must  have  calculated  largely  on  the  pliability  of 
their  readers  when  they  allowed  such  stuff'  as  the 
following  to  go  to  press :  "  their  (the  nuns)  writ- 
ing was  quite  poor,  and  it  was  not  uncommon  for 


6 


them  to  put  a  capital  in  the  middle  of  a  word." 
"  The  only  book  on  Geography  which  we  (the  pupils) 
studied,  was  a  Catechism  of  Geography,  from 
which  ^ve  learnt  by  heart  a  few  questions  and  an- 
swers." "We  were  sometimes  referred  to  a  map, 
but  it  was  only  to  point  out  Montreal  or  Quebec, 
or  some  other  prominent  name ;  while  we  had  no 
instruction  beyond.''  And  again, — "it  would  require 
only  a  proper  cxaminati.on  to  prove,  that  with  the 
exception  of  needle-work,  hardly  any  thing  is 
taught,  excepting  prayers  and  the  catechism  ;  the 
methods  '  of  teaching'  were  very  imperfect." 
When  we  come  to  examine  the  worth  and  capa- 
bility of  the  witness,  the  reader  will  see  how  little 
fitted  that  witness  was  to  give  any  testimony  on 
the  above  matters. 

It  is  stated,  that  "some  of  the  priests  of  the 
seminary  often  visited  the  Congregational  Nunner}^ 
and  bo-th  catecliised  and  talked  with  us  (the  pupils) 
on  religion."  The  errors  here  are  circumstantial, 
and  such  as  a  person  speaking  confidently  on  hasty 
inquiry  would  be  apt  to  rviake.  To  have  made  the 
statement  correct,  it  sliould  have  been  written,  "  The 
chaplain  of  the  Congregational  Nunnery  often  said 
mass  in  our  chapel,  and  occasionally  exhorted 
us  on  religion."  We  will  not  say  that  the  repre- 
sentation made  in  the  "Disclosures"  is  in  any  re- 
spect ofiensive  ;  no,  it  'us  simply  in-jcrrect,  and 
made  by  an  ignorant  person. 

It  is  stated  tiiat  "  the  superior  of  the  "  Black 
Nunnery"  adj'oining,  also  occasionally  came  into 
the  school,  ;.^nd  enlarged  on  the  advantages  we 
(the  pupils)  enjoyed  in  having  such  teachers  ;  and 
dropped  something  now  and  then  relating  to  her 
own  convent,  calculated  to  make  us  entertain  the 


i 


g     IS 

the 


on 


highest  ideas  of  it,  aud  to  make  us  sometimes  think 
of  the  possibility  of  getting  into  it."  Such  some 
may  regard  as  the  language  of  artless  simplicity, 
but  we  know  it  to  be  the  fabrication  of  clumsy 
knavery.  Even  Protestants  may  know  that  it 
would  be  directly  contrary  to  the  rules  and  customs 
of  such  establishments  for  the  superior  of  one  con- 
vent to  visit  the  interior  of  another  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  hor  control-  and  there  indulge  in  such 
interference  as  is  mentioned.  Were  she  so  inclin- 
ed, she  would  not  be  suftbred  to  do  it  by  the 
superior  of  the  convent  so  visited,  and  who  is  bound 
to  guard  against  any  infringement  of  the  privileges 
of  the  institution  over  which  she  presides.  More, 
over,  it  is  known  to  the  pupils  of  the  Congregation, 
that  the  superior  and  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  are 
bound  by  their  vows  never  to  leave  the  precincts 
of  their  convent.  What  she  "  dropped  now  and 
then  relating  to  her  own  convent,  calculated  to 
make  us  entertain  the  highest  ideas  of  it"  is  not 
mentioned.  Did  she  "  now  and  then"  give  the 
assembled  children  an  insight  into  the  practices 
which  are  elsewhere  described  in  the  "  Awful  Dis- 
closures ?"  Miserable  and  disgusting  falsehood  ! 

It  is  stated  that  the  instructions  given  to  the 
pupils  were  particularly  directed  against  the  Pro- 
testant Bible,  and  the  charge  is  made  in  suitable 
language.  They  often  "  enlarged  upon  the  evil  ten- 
dency of  that  book,  and  told  us,  that  but  for  it  many 
a  soul  now  condemned  to  hell,  and  suffering  eter- 
nal punishment,  might  have  been  in  happiness. 
They  could  not  say  ay  thing  in  its  favour,  for  that 
would  be  speaking  agains^  religion  and  against 
God.  They  warned  us  against  its  woe,  and  re- 
presented it  as  a  thing  very  dangerous  to  our  souls." 


10 


Have  we  not  here  a  specimen  of  the  fanatical  ex- 
a«T|Teration  which  may  be  heard  in  any  New-York 
conventicle  where  the  practice  and  doctrine  of 
CatlioHcs,  in  relation  to  the  Scriptures,  are  intro- 
duced I  It  is  utterly  incredible,  nay,  impossible  in 
the  ordinary  course  of  things,  that  the  language 
ascribed  to  the  priests  should  have  been  used  by 
them  ;  but  it  is  well  kn'^wn  that  it  is  daily  invented 
for  them  by  their  detractors,  and  by  the  real  enemies 
of  the  Word  of  God. 

It  is  stated  that  the  religious  instruction  of  the 
pupils  at  the  Congregational  Nunnery  was  conduct- 
ed by  the  priests,  and  that  unwritten  questions  and 
answers  were  proposed  during  the  hours  of  instruc- 
tion, which  the  pretended  writer  of  the  "  Dis- 
closures" has  managed  to  retain  ^^with  tolerable 
accuracy. ^^  We  belivve  that  the  following  intelligi- 
ble, probable,  and  consistent  dialogue  is  copied  with 
"  tolerable  accuracy"  from  the  "  Disclosures." 

Qu-es.  Pourquoi  le  hon  Dieu  n^a  pas  fait  tons  les 
commandemens  ? 

Rcponse,  Parceque  lliomme  71*  est  pas  si  fort  quHl 
pent  garder  tons  Ics  commandemens, 

Ques,  Why  did  not  God  make  all  the  command- 
men-ts  ? 

Ans.  Because  man  is  not  strong  enough  to  keep 
them. 

Ques,     Pourquoi  Vliomme  ne  lit  pas  VEvangile  ? 

Repouse,  Parceque  Vesprit  de  Vhomme  est  trop 
home  et  trop  faible  pour  comprendre  qu'est  ce  que 
Dieu  a  ccrit  ? 

Ques,  W^hy  are  not  men  to  read  the  New  Tes- 
tament  ? 

Ans,  Because  the  mind  of  man  is  too  limited 
and  weak  to  understand  what  God  ha§  written ! 


I 


I 


Tff 


I 


11 


f 


4 


We  have  already  intimated  that  the  only  priest 
who  visits  the  Congregational  Nunnery,  is  the  oth- 
c'.al  chaplain  for  the  time  heing  ;  and  it  is  positively 
false  that  he  interferes  in  the  religious  instruction 
of  the  pupils,  except  inc'dentally  ami  in  tiie  discharge 
of  his  duties  as  chaplain.  The  alleged  interference 
would  he  contrary  to  the  rules  of  the  foundation. 
The  catechism  is  taught,  and  the  principles  o^  re- 
ligion are  explained  by  the  nuns,  who  are  fully 
competent  to  discharge  tliat  duty.  It  is  therefore 
impossible  that  the  writer  of  the  "Disclosures" 
should  be  able  to  recall,  "  even  with  tolerable  accu- 
racy," language  which,  from  the  very  nature  of  the 
institution,  could  never  have  been  uttered  within  its 
walls.  Moreover,  we  may  remark,  that  the  first 
question  and  answer  do  not  present  an  intelligible 
meaning — a  circumstance  which  we  arc  bound  to 
suppose  assisted  the  mind  of  the  witness  in  "  recall- 
ing with  tolerable  accuracy  ;"  and  that  the  second 
is  at  variance  with  the  known  doctrine  and  practice 
of  the  Catholic  church  and  its  members,  lay  and 
clerical.  There  are  other  circumstances  connected 
with  this  statement,  which  heighten  its  absurdity. 
The  French  given  in  the  "  Disclosures"  is  really  not 
French,  and  of  course  the  English,  which  purports 
to  be  a  translation,  is  in  all  probability  the  inven- 
tion of  some  defamatory  conventicle.  The  method, 
unwritten  questions  and  answers,  could  never  have 
been  resorted  to  by  reasoning  beings  for  any  pur- 
pose, good  or  bad.  It  does  not  even  appear  that 
pains  were  taken  to  impress  them  on  the  memory, 
as  it  is  simply  stated  that  the  pupils  did  not  "  read 
them,"  and  that  they  "  were  taught  them  only  by 
word  of  mouth!"  The  written  catechism  referred 
to  in  the  **  Disclosures,"  contains  all  the  command- 


12 


ments  which  Catiiolics  are  bound  to  observe.  The 
priests,  in  their  alleged  unwritten  catechism,  could 
not  present  others  without  subjecting  themselves  to 
the  obvious  criticism,  ewcn  af  children. 

It  is  stated  that  "  the  nuns  had  a  in-ivate  confea- 
sion-room  in  the  building,"  and  that  "  the  boarders 
were  taken  in  parties  througli  the  streets  on  different 
days,  by  some  of  the  nuns,  to  confess  in  the  church 
(of  the  parish) ;"  it  is  added,  that  this  was  not  ne- 
cessary at  the  "  Black  Nunnery,"  as  there  were  there 
"  a  chap^il,  and  priests  attending  in  the  Confession- 
als." This  statement  contains  an  untruth  direct, 
and  an  untruth  by  implication.  It  is  untrue  that 
"the  nuns  had  a  private  confespion-room  in  the 
building ;"  confessions  are  never  heard  within  the 
building,  except  in  cases  of  sickness.  It  is  implied 
that  the  Congregational  Nunnery  has  no  chapel  at- 
tached to  '^ ;  this  is  an  untruth,  and  an  untruth 
clumsily  constructed,  for,  speaking  of  a  first  visit  to 
the  Congregational  School,  the  writer  is  made  to 
say,  "  we  walked  some  distance  along  the  side  of  a 
building  towards  the  chapel."  We  have  examined 
all  the  represe  cations  concerning  the  Congrega- 
tional Nunnery,  and  we  have  shown  them  to  be 
false  in  every  instance.  We  found  the  allegations 
to  be  such,  that  it  was  possible  to  refute  them  with- 
out reference  to  the  personal  character  or  trust- 
worthiness of  the  witness ;  but  when  we  come  to  that 
branch  of  oiu*  subject,  the  effrontery  and  culpabilit\ 
of  the  editors  of  the  "  Disclosures"  will  be  rendered 
even  more  conspicuous  than  they  must  now  appear. 

The  statements  and  charges  concerning  the 
Hotel  Dieu  hospital  are  of  a  mingl«d  description. 
Some  of  them  must  rest  on  the  evidence  ot  the  wo- 
man whose  name  appears  on  tho  title-page  of  the 


f 


ai 


18 


be 


"  Disclosures,"  and  of  individuals  mentioned  in  the 
narrative  ;  others  regard  matters  of  public  no- 
toriety, and  to  public  notoriety  and  the  experience 
of  every  citizen  of  Montreal  we  shall  appeal  in  re- 
futation of  them.  More  the  reader  will  not  deem 
necessary  in  reply  to  a  public  prostitute,  and  the 
canting  hypocrites  who  have  undertaken  to  stand 
l)etween  her  and  the  public  as  pledges  for  her 
"  holiness  and  veracity." 

It  is  stated  that  "  there  are  a  number  of  veiled 
nuns  of  thy.t  convent  (the  Hotel  Dieu),  who  spend 
most  of  their  time  there  (in  the  liospital)."  It  is 
true  that  the  nuns  spend  most  of  tiieir  time  "  in  the 
hospital,"  such  is  their  charitable  profession  ;  but  it 
is  untrue  that  anv  of  them  are  "  veiled,"  if  bv 
this  word  the  concealment  of  the  countenance  iji 
implied. 

Speaking  of  the  employment  of  the  nuns  and  no- 
vices, it  is  stated  "  that  a  rich  carpet,  made  and 
finished  in  the  convent,  was  sent  to  the  king  of 
England  as  an  expression  of  gratitude  for  the  money 
annually  received  fram  the  government."  This  is 
positively  untrue  ;  such  carpet  never  was  "  made 
and  finished  in  the  convent."  The  Hospital  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu  owes  no  gratitude  to  the  king  of  Eng- 
land personally  for  favours  received ;  their  feelings 
towards  his  majesty  are  such  as  they  share  in  com- 
mon with  their  fellow-subjr?cts, — respect  and  loyalty 
to  the  chief  magistrate  of  an  empire,  by  whose 
powei*  and  justice  they  are  protected  in  their  pri- 
vileges as  public  benefactors. 

The  Word  of  God  is  the  Christian's  text,  Pro- 
testants and  Catholics  equally  revere  it ;  but  it  has 
been  the  constant  aim  of  impostors  to  impugn  that 
reverence  and  dispute  its  existence.  Wo  arc  not  sur* 


14 


I   :■! 


prised  to  find  in  the  "  Disclosures"  the  following 
artless  statements.  "  The  priests  would  also  take 
a  verse  or  two,  and  preach  from  it  (the  New  Tes- 
tament). As  for  St.  Paul,  I  remember  as  I  was 
taught  to  understand  it,  that  he  was  once  a  great 
persecutor  of  Roman  Catholics  until  he  Isecame 
convicted,  and  confessed  to  one  of  i\iQ  father  con» 
fessors,  I  don't  know  which."  It  is  not  mentioned 
what  priests  would  "  preach,"  nor  where  they 
preached  in  the  manner  stated  ;  but  it  is  well  known 
that  Roman  Catholic  clergymen  are  probably  more 
^iven  to  scriptural  quotation  than  the  ministers  of 
any  other  denomination  ;  good  taste  is  frequently 
offended  by  their  excess  in  this  particular.  The 
contrary,  which  is  an  untruth,  is  implied  by  the 
artless  insertion  of  the  words  "  a  verse  or  two." 
Moreover,  we  find  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  att'^mpt  to 
create  the  impression  that  the  whole  body  of  priests 
are  to  be  found  interfering  in  the  religious  instruc- 
tion and  internal  concerns  of  the  convents.  As  in 
the  case  of  the  Congregational  Nunnery,  it  is  un- 
true that  any  priest  beside  the  official  chaplain 
visits  the  Hotel  Dieu ;  and  he  does  so  for  the 
especial  purposes  of  saying  mass  in  the  chapel,  and 
praying  with  and  for  the  confined  sick.  In  regard 
to  the  falsification  of  the  scriptural  account  of  St. 
Paul's  conversion,  we  would  cisk,  why  even  imestly 
iniquity  should  be  supposed  capablo  of  committing 
it? 

It  is  stated,  that  in  the  three  convents — the 
Congregational  Nvmnery,  the  Grey  Nunnery,  and 
tlie  Hotel  Dieu — there  are  "  certain  apartments  into 
which  strangers  can  gain  admittance,  but  others  froiii 
which  they  are  always  excluded."  As  the  same 
remark  might  be  made  of  every  building  in  exist' 


15 

ence,  public  or  private,  why  is  it  here  specially 
applied  ?  With,  it  is  obvi(?us,  the  intent  of  prejudic- 
ing the  mind  of  the  ign*)rant  roader  against  a 
specif  s  of  seclusion  which  a  moment's  reflection 
woull  show  is  practised  with  even  greater  rigour 
in  his  own  domicil.  It  cannot  be  said  **  there  are 
certain  apartments"  in  any  private  gentleman's 
house,  "  into  which  strangers  can  obtain  admit- 
tance," even  on  applying  to  the  owMer  for  his  leave. 
The  apartments  to  wh".  h  strangers  visiting  the 
convents  are  admitted,  are  those  devoted  to  our- 
poses  in  which  the  public  are  considered  to  have 
an  interest ;  the  apartments  from  which  they  are 
very  properly  excluded,  are  the  bed-rooms  and 
chambers  of  the  sisterhood.  Vulgar  and  insolent 
men  have,  in  more  instances  than  one,  received 
from  decorum  and  propriety  the  rebuff  which  their 
impertinent  curiosity  merited.  The  vengeance  of 
such  men  finds  its  place  in  these  "  Awful  Disclo- 
sures." 

It  is  stated,  that  "  From  all  that  appears  to  the 
public  eye,  the  nuns  of  these  convents  are  devoted 
to  tlie  charitable  objects  appropriate  to  each — the 
labour  of  making  different  articles  known  to  bo 
manufactured  by  them,  and  the  religious  obser- 
vances which  occupy  a  large  portion  of  their  time. 
They  arc  regarded  with  much  respect  by  the  people 
at  large  ;  and  noiv  and  then,  when  a  novice  takes 
the  veil,  she  is  supposed  to  retire  from  the  temp- 
tations and  troubles  of  this  world  into  a  state  of 
holy  seclusion  ;  v.here,  by  prayer,  self-mortification, 
and  good  deeds,  she  prepares  herself  for  Heaven." 
Such,  we  admit,  is  very  nearly  a  true  picture  of  the 
estimation  in  which  the  convents  and  their  in- 
mates are  held  by  the  people  at  large ;  what  fol- 


16 


lows  is  less  exact.  "  Sometimes  the  superior  of  a 
convent  obtains  thr?  character  of  working  miracles ; 
and  when  such  a  one  dies,  it  is  published  through 
the  country,  and  crowds  throng  the  convents,  who 
think  indulgences  are  to  be  derived  from  bits  of 
her  clothes  or  other  things  she  has  possessed  ;  and 
many  have  sent  articles,  to  be  touched,  to  her  bed 
or  chair,  in  which  a  degree  of  virtue  is  thought  to 
remain."  Here  we  have  manifestly  another  fabri- 
cation of  the  "  conventicle."  The  passage  is  what 
an  impudent  impostor  would  be  ready  to  apply  to 
any  convent  in  the  world — in  Sp?»in,  Portugal,  or 
Italy.  It  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  the  statement,  as 
fur  as  regards  the  Montreal  convents,  is  false,  word 
for  word. 

Our  enumeration  of  the  notorious  misrepresenta- 
tions contained  in  the  "Disclosures"  might  be 
much  further  extended.  Same  of  them,  not  here 
mentioned,  will  be  pointed  out  elsewhere.  Those 
we  have  selected  are  sufficient  to  raise  at  least 
doubts  on  the  credibility  of  a  "  witness,"  who,  by  her 
own  pretensions,  was  placed  beyond  the  possibility  of 
error.     She  was  a  nun  ! 


CHAPTER  m. 

Manifest  absurdities,  toniradidions,  and  falsehoods  nf  the  preltnded 
"  DISCLOSURES." 


We  have  contended  that  no  nrnn  of  integrity, 
honesty,  or  ordinary  intelligence,  would  hesitate  to 
pronounce  apriori  the  narrative  which  bears  Monk's 
name  to  be  a  tissue  of  ill-coHstructed  lies  from  be- 


17 


a 

'S; 

lO 

of 

nd 

)ed 

to 

)ri- 

lat 

to 

or 

as 

ord 


i 


I 


ginning  to  end.  Wc  say,  that  the  very  narrative 
bears  on  the  face  of  it  the  evidence  of  imposture  ; 
and  for  this  reason,  among  others,  we  have  ventured 
to  impugn  the  motives  as  well  as  the  acts  of  the 
"  teachers  of  the  people,"  who  had  undertaken  to 
uphold  it.  That  we  have  not  erred  in  expressly 
stigmatizing  those  persons  as  debased  and  disgraced 
by  the  touch  of  manifest  falsehood,  it  is  now  our 
business  to  prove.  It  will  appear  that  our  materi- 
als are  ample.  A  straight-forward,  well-told  con- 
sistent story  may  be  plausible  though  fictitious  ; 
but  the  story  given  on  the  authority  of  the  woman 
Monk,  has  nat  even  the  most  ordinary  essentials  of 
verisimilitude  ;  'till  less  has  it  that  cunning  adap- 
tation of  means  to  ends  which  forms  the  great  at- 
traction of  Nursery  tales.  If  the  "  Awful  Disclo- 
sures" have  obtained  credence,  we  do  not  see  why 
even  at  this  day  the  truth  of  Daniel  De  Foe's  ce- 
lebrated Stories  of  Dreanis  should  be  disputed. 
Both  have  been  attended  with  the  same  success. 
The  one  procured  the  sale  of  "  Drelincourt  on 
Death,"  the  other  has  dispersed,  among  tens  of 
thousands  of  eager  readers,  "  Monk  on  Murde-r." 
At  the  very  outset  of  the  "  Disclosures,"  some 
startling  demands  are  made  on  our-  sympathy  and 
credulity.  Thus  we  are  informed,  that  "  according 
to  her  earliest  recollections,  her  father  was  very 
attentive  to  his  family  ;"  that  "  she  may  very  yrO' 
hably  have  been  taught  by  him  a  particular  passage 
from  the  Bible,"  which  often  occurred  to  her  "  in 
after-life  ;"  that,  **  after  his  death"  she  "  received 
no  religious  instruction  at  home  ;"  "  that  her  mo- 
ther neglected  her  children  in  this  respect."  She 
was  therefore  capable  of  judging  her  father's  con- 
duct at  the  age  of  six  or  sevea,  and  of  recollecting 

a* 


18 


the  serious  judgment  then  formed  at  a  much  subse- 
quent period  !  The  probabiUty  of  "  a  particular 
passage  from  the  Bible"  having  been  taught  her 
by  her  father  while  yet  an  infant,  must  have  ap- 
peared to  her  present  advisers  most  affecting  ;  and 
the  sacrifice  of  filial  piety  exhibited  in  her  reflec- 
tions on  the  mismanagement  of  her  surviving  pa- 
rent, must  have  filled  them  with  admiration  !  She 
proceeds  to  say,  "  To  my  want  of  religious  instruc- 
tion at  home,  and  the  ignorance  of  my  Creator 
and  my  duty,  which  was  its  natural  consequence, 
I  think  I  can  trace  my  introduction  to  convents  !" 
She  is  made  to  "  thinW^  what  it  is  morally  impos- 
sible that  any  intelligent  being  could  think.  What 
connection  did  her  prompters  discover  between  her 
'**  want  of  religious  instruction  at  home,"  and  her 
entrance  into  a  convent  ? 

We  request  attention  to  the  following  passage. 
"  When  about  six  or  seven  years  of  age,  I  went  to 
school  to  a  Mr.  Workman,  a  protestant,  who  taught 
in  Sacrament  Street,  and  remained  there  several 
months.  There  I  learned  to  read  and  write,  and 
arithmetic  as  far  as  division.  AH  the  progress  I 
ever  made  in  those  branches  was  gained  in  that 
school,  as  I  have  never  made  any  progress  in  them 
since."  The  progress  made  by  a  child  "  six  or  seven 
years  of  age,"  in  "  reading;  writing,  and  arithmetic 
as  far  as  division,"  is  remarkable  enough  ;  but  n®.t 
quite  so  much  so  as  the  ability  of  the  grown  up 
woman  to  apply  the  acquirements  of  that  age,  never 
improoed  upon,  to  the  composition  of  the  "  Awful 
Disclosures !" 

The  foolish  absurdities  of  these  pretended  "  Dis- 
closures" crowd  upon  us  as  we  proceed.  She  in- 
forms hor  readers,  that  ^^  th«  schools  taught  by  the 


19 


|se- 
llar 

\er 
|ap- 

md 
lec- 


•uc- 
Ltor 
ice. 


^H 


Congregational  nuns  are  more  numerous  than 
some  may  imagine."  Why  her  readers  should  im- 
agine  any  thing  on  the  subject,  is  not  apparent ;  but, 
by  way  of  supplying  the  imaginations  of  her  readers, 
siie  proceeds,  in  the  very  next  sentence,  to  coin  an 
absolute  untruth,  which  we  have  already  noticed, 
respecting  those  same  nuns.  When  "about  ten 
years  old,"  the  girl,  whose  judgment  at  the  age  of 
six  or  seven  was  so  precocious,  began  to  think  sei*i- 
ously  (!)  about  going  to  the  Congregational  school ! 
The  time  that  elapsed  between  that  moment  of 
"  serious  thought"  and  her  entrance  into  the  school, 
is  not  nientioned.  We  repeat  here,  that  the  utter 
absence  of  dates  from  the  pretended  "  Disclosures," 
ought  in  itself  to  have  been  sufhcient  to  cause  their 
rejection  by  a  man  of  common  sense  and  common 
honesty.  The  want  of  both  may  safely  be  imputed 
to  the  men  ^vho  have  presumed  to  say, — "  Here  is 
a  narrative  wl'iich  bears  on  it  the  stamp  of  truth." 
It  is  not  stated  at  what  age  she  entered  the  school, 
or  in  what  year,  or  under  what  circumstances; 
or  whether  on  her  mother's  application  or  otherwise  ; 
or  whether  as  a  poor  scholar  or  as  a  paying  scholar ; 
or  whether  as  a  day  scholar  or  as  a  boarder.  All 
those  things,  essential  tg  the  verisimilitude  of 
the  narrative,  and,  one  would  suppose,  so  neces- 
sarv  to  satisfy  the  minds  of  honest  vouchers  for  its 
truth,  are  wholly  past  over  without  notice.  Her 
introduction  into  the  convent  is  briefly  told.  "  I 
was  conducted  by  some  of  my  young  friends."  These 
"young  friends"  she  speaks  of  just  before  as  "  girls 
of  her  acquaintance,"  who  attended  the  school. 
*'  On  my  entrance,"  she  proceeds  to  say,  "  the  su- 
perior met  me,  and  told  me  first  of  all  that  I  must 
always  dip  my  fingers  into  the  Holy  water  at  her 


.j5. 


20 


door,  cross  myself,  and  say  a  short  prayer ;  and 
this  she  told  me  was  always  required  of  Protestants 
as  w-ell  as  Catholics.  It  must  he  remarked,  that 
this  interesting  piece  of  information  is  vouchsafed 
to  the  new-comer  in  the  school-room,  and  of  course 
in  the  presence  of  her  "  young  friends"  and  others 
there  present.  Thus,  in  the  first  place  we  are  re- 
quired to  believe  that  the  superior,  a  woman,  it 
must  be  supposed,  of  some  sense,  advised  the  new- 
comer of  a  trifling  obsc-rvance  before  the  occasion 
for  that  observance  arrived,  and  even  before  a  girl 
in  Monk's  situation  could  be  expected  to  under- 
stand it ;  for  she  had  Mot  as  yet  seen  the  superior, 
or  the  "  door,"  or  the  threshold,  or  the  "  Holy  wa- 
ter" into  which  she  was  to  "  dip  her  fingers."  In 
the  second  place,  we  are  required  to  believe  that  the 
superior  did  actually  risk  the  h^ss  of  that  esteem,  in 
which,  it  is  admitted,  the  convent  was  held,  by  re- 
quiring of  a  girl,  with  whose  character  she  was  un- 
acquainted, practices  forbidden  by  the  religion  in 
which  that  girl  was  brought  up.  These  considera- 
tions do  not  appear  to  have  weighed  with  her  fanati- 
cal editors.  Neither  does  it  appear  to  have  struck 
their  apprehensions  that  it  was  ridiculously  absurd  to 
allow,  that  the  opinions  of  a  jrirl,  whose  sole  know- 
ledge, acquired  "  when  about  six  or  seven  years  of 
age,"  and  in  the  space  of  some  months,  was  limited 
to  "  reading,  writing,  and  arithmetic  as  far  as  divi. 
sion,"  on  the  education  received  in  the  school,  were 
worthy  of  belief  and  attention.  That  those  opi- 
nions are  defamatory,  only  renders  their  easy  recep- 
tion the  more  culpable.  We  have,  in  a  previous 
chapter,  pointed  out  the  little  foundation  there  was 
for  them. 

She  remained,  as  is  stated,  "  about  two  years'*  at 


21 


the  Congregational  school ;  at  \\  liat  age  or  in  what 
year  she  left  it,  is  not  mentioned  ;  but  she  does  not 
hesitate  to  make  a  second  sacrifice  of  her  filial  piety, 
in  describing  her  condition  while  at  home.  "I 
soon  became  dissatisfied,  having  many  and  severe 
trials  to  endure  at  home,  which  my  feelings  will  not 
permit  me  to  describe,"  Why  she  conquered  her 
feelings  so  far  as  to  say  so  much  as  is  conveyed  in 
the  above  passage,  or  why  the  allusion  to  ker  mo- 

I  ther,  who  is  still  living,  was  necessary  to  complete 
the    "  Awful  Disclosures"  of  "  Popish  Iniquity," 

i  does  not  appear  on  the  face  of  the  narrative. 
While  still  at  the  school,  i^he  is  told  "  one  day"  by 
"  a  girl  thirteen  years  old,"  of  the  conduct  of  a 
priest  at  "confession,"  which  "astonished her."  The 
story  has  some  of  the  requisites  of  rational  evi- 
dence ;  the  time  at  which  it  was  told  is  mentioned, 
"  one  day  ;"  also  the  place  where  it  was  told,  the 
school-room,  and  the  age  of  the  narrator,  are  care- 
fully described.  Who  could  doubt  its  trutli,  par- 
ticularly as  it  is  stated  that  the  girl  thirteen  years 
old  informed  her  mother  of  it,  "  who  expressed  no 
anger  nor  disapprobation  !"  Another  story  is  told 
her,  by  "  a  girl  of  the  school,"  of  a  murder  commit- 
ted by  a  priest  on  the  person  of  "  a  young  Squaw." 
Why  the  priest  murdered,  and  why  he  then  ran 
away,  are  most  ingeniously  accounted  for ;  it  is 
intimated  as  a  reason  for  the  latter,  that  timely  no- 
tice was  conveyed  to  him  in  a  note  by  an  Indian  f 
8uch  are  th©  "Disclosures"  which  the  Montreal 
priests  are  summoned  to  refute. 

"  At  length  I  determined  to  become  a  Black  nun," 
are  the  opening  words  of  the  third  chapter  of  the 
"Disclosures."  The  "at  length"  is  admirable. 
One  would  b«  apt  to  suppose  that  she  has  just  b«en 


22 


desoribing  her  self-communings,  her  struggles 
against  her  vocation  for  a  religious  life,  and  the 
difficulties  she  encountered  in  obeying  the  call. 
There  is  nothing  of  the  kind,  and  the  force  of  the 
"  at  length''  must  remain  a  mystery  until  expound- 
ed by  her  present  confessors.  The  probable  truth 
of  her  having  formed  "  the  determination  of  becom- 
ing  a  Black  nun,"  may  be  estimated  by  the  context 
of  the  narrative.  Among  the  inducing  motives, 
the  reader  will  rank  "  her  ignorance  of  her  Crea- 
tor," her  intercourse  with  the  nuns  of  the  Congre- 
gational Nunnery,  described  as  dissatisfactory  to 
her  precocious  intellect ;  the  influence  produced  on 
her  mind  by  the  occasional  lectures  (which  could 
never  have  been  given)  of  the  superior  of  the  Black 
Nunnery ;  the  stories  told  her  of  the  priests  while 
at  the  Congregational  school,  forming  a  portion  of 
the  information  received  from  "  her  Catholic  ac- 
quaintances in  favour  of  their  faith ;"  and  finally, 
her  positive  knowledge  that,  as  an  inmate  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu,  her  occupation  through  life  would  be 
that  of  a  sick  nurse ;  a  pleasing  prospect  to  a  young 
girl,  who  could  not,  by  her  own  confession,  have 
been  urged  to  it  by  religious  feelings  !  "  While  out 
of  the  nunnery,"  she  says  in  the  preceding  chap- 
ter, "  I  saw  nothing  of  religion ;"  and  while  in  the 
nunnery,  the  saw  nothing  but  what  was  frivolous 
and  repugnant  to  her  feelings ;  her  ears  were  sa- 
luted with  tales  of  blood  and  debauchery  !  The  ab- 
surdity of  this  part  of  the  narrative  might  perhaps 
have  been  avoided,  or  at  least  concealed,  by  the 
editors  p.  oposing  one  simple  question^ — ^**  why  did 
you  at  length  determine  ?"  They  might  have  ex- 
hibited her  acting  without  deliberation ;  hut  imbe* 
cility  and  knavery  are  closely  allied. 


w 
h( 
G 


23 


rgles 

the 

J  call. 

fthe 

mnd- 

truth 

Icom- 

itext 

;ives, 

'rea- 


We  are  not  able  to  discover  from  the  narrative 
that  the  slightest  control  was  exercised  over  the 
actions  of  Monk  from  her  earliest  infancy.  This 
is  unaccounted  for.  She  mentions,  that  on  her  first 
application  to  be  received  as  a  novice  into  the 
"  Blaek  Nunnery,"  the  superior  told  her  "  that  she 
must  make  some  inquiries  before  she  could  give  a 
decided  answer."  To  whom  the  inquiries  were  put 
is  not  stated.  "  At  length,"  at  the  expiration  of  a 
fortnight,  she  calls  at  the  "  Black  Nunnery,"  and 
is  forthwith  admitted  as  a  "  novice  !"  How  very 
artless !  The  year  in  which  she  thus  entered  and 
her  age  aro  omitted  ;  but,  to  supply  this  deficiency, 
we  are  told  that  the  day  was  "  Thursday,"  and  the 
hour,  "  about  ten  o'clock  in  the  morning !"  As  to 
when  she  became  a  convert  to  the  Catholic  faith 
we  are  left  in  the  dark ;  that  she  apparently  was  a 
convert  at  the  time  of  her  alleged  entrance  into 
the  Hotel  Dieu,  may  be  inferred ;  that  she  really 
was,  her  preceding  narrative  renders  incredible. 

The  "  Awful  Disclosures"  make  a  pamphlet  of 
231  pages,  twenty  of  which  would  be  sufficient  to 
contain  all  that  relates  to  their  ostensible  purpose, 
the  exposure  of  "  Popish  Iniquity."  This  object 
has  been  combined  in  the  publication  of  the  pam- 
phlet with  another  of  no  less  importance.  Pages 
are  filled  up  with  the  most  frivolous  and  disgusting 
trash,  and  a  book  is  produced,  the  sale  of  which 
yields  some  seven  or  eight  thousand  dollars  to  the 
parties  concerned.  We  see  that  a  certain  P.  Gor- 
don has  ventured  to  put  his  name  as  proprietor  of 
the  copyright.  We  trust  that  all  honest  men,  all 
who  detest  calumny  and  despise  impostors,  will 
hereafter  be  on  their  guard  in  the  company  of  "  P. 
Gordon  ;"  and  that,  shoula  they  at  any  time  iden- 


24 


tify  the  creature  of  the  prostitute  Mmk  and  her 
infamous  advisers,  they  will  treat  the  wretch  to  a 
"  pointed  figure." 

With  an  appearance  of  veracious  detail  she  de- 
scribes her  first  day  at  the  convent ;  but  even  here 
it  is  easy  to  discern  the  fabrications  of  the  "  penny- 
a-liner."  She  enters  the  institution  with  "much sa- 
tisfaction ;"  passes  the  morning  with  the  novices, 
"  expecting,  with  painful  anxiety,  the  dinner  hour  f 
We  take  this  to  be  an  obscure  hint,  that  in  the 
course  of  the  morning  her  "  satisfaction"  became 
affected  by  serious  apprehensions  of  her  destination 
at  the  approaching  meal  ;*doubtful  whether  she  was 
to  be  a  guest  or  a  dish.  The  poor  girl,  however, 
is  not  spitted  ;  she  is  suffered  to  live,  to  eat  her 
dinner  in  silence  ;  to  learn  rules  and  ceremonies,  to 
sit  by  windows,  to  mark  the  waywardness  of  a  cer- 
tain Jane  Ray,  of  whom  more  hereafter  ;  t&  listen 
to  stories  which  make  "  a  deep  impression  on  her 
mind ;"  to  comb  the  superior's  head,  and  pick  up 
"  all  the  stray  hairs  ;"  to  confess  her  sins,  and  be 
strangely  questioned  by  the  priests  ;  to  form  shrewd 
guesses  "  of  the  confession-rooms"  of  the  veiled 
nuns ;  to  see  gags,  and  see  them  used ;  to  study 
French  and  Latin  prayers,  not  for  present  use,  but 
to  prepare  for  the  "  easy  repetition  of  them  after  she 
should  be  admitted  as  a  nun ;"  and  to  regret  that 
she  had  no  opportunity  of  storing  her  mind,  of  po- 
lishing her  manners,  or  of  studying  the  higher 
branches  of  "  Education !"  Such  are  the  plausible 
details  of  some  ten  or  eleven  pages  of  these  "  Awful 
Disclosures." 

The  first  sentence  of  the  next  chapter  exposed 
the  foiled  cunning  of  the  association  of  impostors. 
She  quits  the  convent «  without  ob»tacle,"  and  given 


f 


1 


i?*x. 


I 


! 


25 


her  reason  in  the  following  words.  **  After  I  had 
been  a  novice  four  or  five  years,  that  is,  from  the 
time  that  I  commenced  school  at  the  convent,  one 
day  I  was  treated  bv  one  of  the  nuns  in  a  manner 
which  displeased  me,  and  because  I  expressed  some 
resentment,  was  required  to  beg  her  pardon.  Not 
being  satisfied  with  this,  although  I  complied  with 
the  command,  nor  with  the  coolness  with  which  the 
superior  treated  me,  I  determined  to  quit  the  con- 
vent at  once,  which  1  did  without  asking  leave." 
There  are  two  manifest  falsehoods  in  this  statement, 
which  it  is  easy  to  discover  by  comparing  it  with 
what  precedes.  Is  not  the  explanation  of  the  time 
of  her  noviciate  a  deliberate  lie  ?  Let  us  see. — She 
commenced  school  at  the  Congregation,  and  re- 
mained there  "  about  two  years."  These  two  years 
spent  at  school  in  one  convent,  she  includes  in  the 
time  of  noviciate  spent  in  another.  Again,  "  after 
she  left  the  Congregational  Nunnery,"  she  did  not 
immediately  become  an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu, 
but  "  attended  several  different  schools,"  and  lived 
at  home.  The  interval  of  time,  as  has  already 
been  remarked,  between  her  leaving  one  convent 
and  joining  another,  is  not  mentioned  ;  but  what- 
ever it  was,  whether  great  or  small,  it  is  included 
in  the  "  four  or  five  ^""ears"  of  noviciate  at  the  Hotel 
Dieu.  The  reason  assigned  for  leaving  the  latter 
institution  is  equally  contradictory.  It  is  incredi- 
ble that  a  girl,  whom  the  spectacle  of  horrible 
cruelty  practised  on  the  novices,  the  (to  her)  un- 
satisfactory routine  of  the  cloisters,  the  "  strange 
questions"  of  priests,  could  not  induce  to  fly,  should 
do  so  because  required  to  beg  pardon  for  an  of- 
fence. Her  "  dissatisfaction"  toward  the  superior, 
whom  eh©  yrQ.%  taught  to   regard,  and  whom  sho 


28 


•tates  she  actually  did  regard,  as  a  "  sain^,"  is  an 
obvious  coinage  of  the  penny-a-liner.  "  Soon  after,*' 
we  find  her  at  St.  Denis,  engaged  as  an  assistant 
teacher  in  a  government  school ;  a  situation  for 
which,  it  will  be  recollected,  the  instruction  receiv- 
ed by  her  at  the  age  of  six  or  seven  years  was  her 
only  qualification.  While  in  this  situation  she  dis- 
covers that  "  ciphering"  i«  an  improper  expression, 
and  that  the  bag  of  the  superior'f.  "  suay  hairs" 
cures  the  tooth-ache  !  She  marries,  separates  from 
her  husband,  and  finally  resolves,  without  any  ima- 
ginable inducement,  to  return  to  the  convent  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu.  To  effect  her  purpose,  she  persuades 
the  "  lady"  with  whom  she  had  been  associated  as 
a  teacher,  to  conceal  her  marriage,  and  disin- 
terestedly lie  for  her  t®  the  superior  of  the  convent 
and  priests  of  the  seminary.  She  robs  her  mother 
of  thirty  dollars,  and  by  other  robberies  effected  on 
several  of  her  friends,  she  raises  a  number  of  pounds, 
part  of  which  she  deposits  in  the  convent  treasury. 
The  superior,  whom  she  regards  as  a  "  saint,"  and 
whose  "  stray  hairs"  she  carries  in  a  bag-,  receives 
•*  the  money  with  evident  satisfaction,"  knowing, 
of  course,  that  it  must  have  been  dishonestly  ob- 
tained ! 

As  usual,  this  narrative,  which  it  is  pretended 
bears  on  it  the  stamp  of  truth,  does  not  state  what 
time  elapsed  between  her  leaving  the  Hotel  Dieu 
and  her  return  to  it,  or  the  date  of  the  latter  event ! 
Have  these  omitted  fabrications  rendered  the  copy- 
right more  valuable  to  "  P.  Gordon"  and  his  asso- 
ciates? Under  the  head  of  Specimen  of  "instruc- 
tions received  on  the  subject  of  confirmation,"  she 
relates  stories  of  fire  and  brimstone,  which  "  she 
wa«  told  j"  and  concludes  her  fifth  chapter  by  the 


27 


an 

ant 
for 
eiv- 
her 
dis- 


following  statement.  "  I  was  required  to  devote 
myself  for  about  a  year  to  the  study  of  the  prayers, 
and  the  practice  of  the  ceremonies  necessary  on 
the  reception  of  a  nun."  How  does  this  agree 
witli  the  previous  statement,  that  such  was  the 
principal  occupation  of  the  novices  from  the  com- 
mencement of  their  noviciate  to  the  expiration  of 
it  ?  The  statements  are  contradictory,  and  are 
each  of  them  obviously  false. 

When  her  noviciate  ceased,  or  how  long  it  last- 
ed,  cannot  in  any  manner  be  inferred  from  th«  nar- 
rative. Respecting  the  date  of  her  becoming  a 
pjrofessed  nun,  the  narrative  is  equally  silent.  It 
is  simply  stated,  that  one  day  the  "  Bishop  came,** 
and  made  her  one.  On  the  same  day  she  is  gra- 
ciously informed  by  the  "  saintly  superior"  of  the 
exictence  of  dungeons,  and  of  victims  therein  con- 
fined ;  of  the  pr- ctices  of  priests,  "  which  come  on 
her  like  a  flash  of  lightning,"  notwithstanding  her 
previous  experience  acquired  at  confession,  and 
derived  from  the  stories  of  her  "  young  compa- 
nions ;"  and  finally,  of  the  pious  practice  of  stran- 
gling infants  for  the  purpose  of  securing  their  eternal 
happiness  !  A  number  of  nuns  are  admitted  to  join 
in  the  conversation,  whose  representations  affect, 
even  to  •<  indecision,"  the  mind  of  the  young  nun 
on  the  obscure  subject  of  the  criminality  of  impu- 
dicity  and  blood-shedding.  Forgetting,  that  from 
the  very  commencement  of  her  intercourse  with 
Catholics,  her  ears  were  saluted  with  debauchery 
and  murder,  she  proceeds  to  say  that  there  was 
"  60  much  that  disgusted  lier  in  the  discovery  sho 
then  made,"  that  she  would  gladly  have  escaped, 
had  it  been  in  her  power  ;  but  the  obstacles  in  the 
way  of  flight,  so  easy  to  the  novice,  were  suddenly 


tiB 


rendered  almost  invincible  to  the  *'  nun,"  in  what 
manner  the  reader  is  left  to  imagine.  The  "  Dis- 
closures" of  the  dinner  ceremonial  of  the  reception 
day  are  not  very  horrible,  but  they  help  to  till  a 
space.  "  Late  in  the  afternoon"  is  stated  to  have 
been  perpetrated  the  first  crime  of  surpassing  atro- 
city resting  on  the  alleged  personal  cognizance  of 
the  witness  Maria  Monk.  The  "  disclosure  is  re- 
luctantly made,  to  expose  the  conduct  of  priests  in 
our  convent,"  and  to  gratify  the  imaginations  of 
the  people  of  the  United  States.  Admitting  these 
motives  to  be  good,  which  they  certainly  are  not, 
at  least  in  a  Christian  sense,  the  most  fanatical 
sectarian,  or  the  most  imaginative  ©f  dreamers,  if 
possessed  of  a  grain  of  honest  sincerity,  will  not 
hesitate  to  acknowledge  that  the  pretended  expo- 
sure  is  a  dastardly,  but  most  fortunately  a  raost 
stupid  and  easily  detected  calumny. 

The  seventh  chapter,  on  "  daily  ceremonies,''  com- 
mences with  singular  pretension  to  accuracy.  "  On 
Thursday  morning  the  bell  rung  at  half-past  six,  to 
waken  us."  This  "  Thursday"  stands  alone.  Was 
it  a  Thursday  in  1820  or  1830  ?  Who  may  tell 
from  the  narrative  ?  The  treatment  she  received 
**  very  late  in  the  afternoon,"  and  which  is  described 
at  the  close  of  the  preceding  chapter,  appears  to  have 
cleared  her  mind  of  all  "  indecision,"  and  brought 
it  a  state  of  calmness  and  impartiality  befitting  the 
keen  observer  and  accurate  memorialist.  Accord- 
ingly  we  are  favoured  from  page  64  with  fifty-six 
pages  of  "Popish"  legends — of  conventual  obscr- 
vances  and  conventual  principles  of  morality. 
Chapter  the  eleventh  describes  a  murder,  which  is 
agreeably  refreshing.  "  The  time  was  about  five 
months  after  I  took  the  veil ;  the  weather  was  cool, 


T 


29 


Dis' 

tion 
ilia 
lavc 
itro- 
c  of 
3  re- 
ts ill 
ns  of 
hese 
not, 
tical 
rs,  if 
I  not 


perhaps  in  September  or  October  !'*  The  recitals  of 
mingled  bloodshed,  debauchery,  and  frivolity  extend- 
ed throughout  the  rest  of  the  pamphlet,  absurd  as 
they  manifestly  are,  will  all  be  found  answered  in 
a  subsequent  chapter  of  this  refutation. 

We  were  at  a  loss  to  account  foi' the  expression, 
"  an  old  woman  for  a  nun,  that  is  to  say,  about 
forty,"  applied  to  a  nun  at  page  30,  until  we  met 
with  the  following  explanation  at  page  82.  "It 
was  a  common  remark  always  at  the  initiation  of  a 
new  nun  into  the  Black  nun  department,  that  is,  to 
receive  the  black  veil,  that  the  introduction  of  ano- 
ther novice  into  the  convent  as  a  veiled  nun  always 
caused  the  introduction  of  a  veiled  nun  into  heaven 
as  a  saint,  which  was  on  account  of  the  singular 
disappearance  of  some  of  the  older  nuns  always  at 
the  entrance  of  new  onec."  The  explanation,  how- 
ever, is  not  complete  ;  for  there  is  constant  mention 
throughout  the  narrative  of  "  old  nuns,"  and  the  rea- 
der is  induced  to  suppose  that  there  is  "  always"  a 
reasonable  number  of  them  ;  so  that,  even  in  the  de- 
velopment of  one  of  the  main  objects  of  the  Disclo- 
sures, allowed  murder  and  hints  of  murder,  the  au- 
thors of  this  libel  are  not  consistent.  We  pause 
here  to  make  a  few  obvious  reflections  suggested 
by  the  paragraph  just  quoted.  It  is  to  be  inferred 
from  the  narnitivo,  that  tlic  so  called  "  Black  nuns" 
live  in  a  state  of  independence,  and  that  theiir  obe- 
dience  to  the  priests  is  voluntary.  They  have 
tlieir  own  buildinji^s  and  their  own  grounds.  The 
deeds  done  in  the  convent  are  *'no  secret,"  they 
are  known  to  all,  old  and  young,  for  all  participate 
in  them.  Now,  we  are  required  to  believe,  that  in 
a  community  thus  constituted,  the  members  have 
consented  to  surrender  themselves  to  "singular  dfi<h 


30 


appearances,"  or  more  plainly,  to  slaughtei*,  when 
such  sacrifice  shall  be  exacted  of  them !  We  are 
required  to  credit  that  they  wade  their  way  through 
torrents  of  blood  and  sinks  of  hideous  debauchery 
to  their  own  premature  graves  :  and  this  knowing- 
ly, and  with  the  certainty  of  the  fate  which  finally 
awaits  them  !  There  is  no  distinction  of  persons  ; 
the  community  is  not  represented  as  divided  into 
despots  and  slaves,  there  is  a  perfect  equality — all 
live  in  murder,  and  may  expect  to  die  by  it.  The 
superior  herself  does  not  escape  the  general  lot ; 
her  "singular  disappearance"  is  noticed  at  page 
180.  It  is  sickening  to  contemplate  use  of  lan- 
guage at  once  so  insulting  to  the  understanding 
and  disgusting  to  the  imagination. 

The  escape  of  "  Maria  Monk"  is  a  close  imita- 
tion of  the  published  erasion  of  the  notorious  "  Miss 
Read."  By  her  own  account  she  was  in  frequent 
attendance  on  the  visiting  physician  of  the  hospital, 
an  eminent  practitioner  of  the  city,  and  a  Protestant. 
Instead  of  communicating  her  desire  to  withdraw 
from  the  convent  to  that  gentleman,  who  would  not 
and  could  not  have  delayed  for  a  moment  its  accom- 
plishment, she  prefers  running  a  risk,  a  great  risk — 
the  risk  of  life  itself.  She  is  at  "  liberty ;"  but 
when,  in  what  year  or  month,  it  is  impossible  to 
discover  from  the  narrative. 

We  have  shown  that  the  narrative  is  glaringly 
deficient  in  verisimilitude,  that  it  is  marked  at 
every  step  !)y  revolting  contradictions  and  absur- 
dities, and  that  these  may  be  perceived  by  the 
most  prejudiced  reader  without  tlie  aid  of  special 
information.  Special  information,  however,  we 
have,  and  special  information  we  shall  produce,  to 
the  confusion  of  cahunniators,  and  with  the  sincere 


fi 


ax 


<« 


are 

ugh 

lery 

ing. 

lally 

ons ; 

into 

I— all 

The 

lot; 

page 

Ian- 


hdpe  not  that  tliey  may  become  objects  of  public 
execration,  but  that  they  may  cease  to  bo  objects  of 
public  regard.  Grant  them  compassion,  but  deny 
them  countenance. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

The  source  of  some  of  the  fahehooih  ron'Mined  m  llie  ^*  Awful  Dis- 
closures" pointed  out. 

To  give  the  witness  Monk  some  respectability  of 
family,  it  is  stated  that  !ier  fatkcr  "  was  an  officer 
under  the  British  governmeni,"  and  that  her  "mo- 
ther has  enjoyed  a  pension  on  that  account  ever 
since  his  death."  The  truth  is,  that  her  father  was 
removed  from  a  menial  situation  in  a  tavern  at 
Quebec,  and  placed,  by  the  interest  of  some  officers, 
in  the  situation  of  barrack-ma.ster  at  St.  John's. 
Her  mother  is  a  domestic  employed  at  the  gover- 
nor's house  in  Montrej:^.!,  and  receives  as  wages  two 
shillings  per  diem. 

The  falsehood  that  "  Coimreoational  nuns  arc 
established  as  instructrcs.-;e.>  in  different  parts  of 
the  United  State.?,"  evide-iily  ori^rinated  in  the  de- 
sire to  prejudice  readers  against  (^atholic  teachers 
generally,  by  eAcitlng  ainong  the  ignorant  the  sus- 
picion that  they  Jiiav  he  from  Canada.  Now, 
v/hether  tlie  nims  ofAioiUrcal  are  redeemed  or  not 
from  obloquy  by  tiiis  reluititloii,  we  repeat,  that 
none  belonging  U)  the  loundation  of  the  "  Congre- 
gation," as  mentioned  in  I'lo  '•  Disclosures,"  or  to 
any  other,  are  to  be  met  v/it!i  in  tiie  United  States. 
Missions  are  sent  from  the  convent  of  tbe  Congre- 
gation to  various  parts  of  Canada  ;  a  convenient 


82 


stroke  of  the  pen  extends  them  in  the  "  Disclosures" 
to  the  United  States. 

Careless  readers  may  in  some  instances  havo 
I^een  iinposed  upon  by  the  appearance  of  detail 
which  the  "  Disclosures"  exhibit  in  describing  the 
practices  and  discipline  of  Conventual  life.  A 
sufficient  foundation  for  the  construction  of  similar 
details  exists  in  thousands  of  narratives  and  ro- 
mances to  be  found  in  every  language.  The  ad- 
visers of "  Monk"  would  hav^e  been  wise  had  they 
confined  themselves  to  mere  invention,  and  s-o  much 
of  compila.tion  as  coirid  have  been  safely  interwo- 
ven in  the  story.  It  was  foolish  in  them  to  have 
used  "  Monk"  for  any  other  purpose  than  as  the 
ostensible  vehicle  by  which  their  slanders  might  be 
conveyed  to  the  world.  In  what  she  has  supplied, 
the  manifest  falsehood  is  so  close  to  the  pro- 
bable trwth,  that  the  perception  of  the  one  instantly 
leads  to  the  rejection  of  the  other.  Maria  Monk 
has  had  some  experience  of  a  species  of  Conventu- 
al l>fe  gained  bv  a  residence  of  several  months  in 
an  institution  of  the  city  of  Montreal,  commonly 
known  as  the  3Iagdalen  Asylum.  The  Asylum  is 
under  the  control  and  direction  of  a  charitable  lady, 
who  has  for  many  years  appropriated  her  revenues 
and  devoted  her  whole  time  to  the  wretched  and 
sinful  of  her  sex.  This  lady,  Mrs.  McDonell,  re- 
ceived  "  Maria  Moj:ik"  into  her  establishmen.t,  and 
endeavoured,  by  every  means  in  her  power,  to  restore 
her  to  habits  of  virtue  :  but  M(/nk  proved  a  harden- 
ed  sinner,  and  the  efforts  of  her  benevolent  instruc- 
tress were  lUtimatcIy  unsuccessful.  Monk  left  the 
Asylum,  and  for  several  months  wrmdered  about  from 
place  to  place  as  the  prett.'nded  wife  of  a  disgraxied 
and  cast-olf  ck^rorvman.     To  this  man,  who  know 


44 


th 


M 


i 


33 


.»> 


ave 
itail 
the 
A 


h^r  real  character,  and  liow  abaHcloned  it  was,  she 
';ommunicated  the  history  oC  her  residence  at  Mrs. 
McDonell's,  and  his  love  of  lucre  immediately  sug- 
gested the  use  which  might  be  made  of  it.  Such 
is  the  real  origin  of  the  "  Awful  Disclosures." 

Mrs.  McDoneli  i«  a  devout  v/oman,  and  she  has 
adopted  in  the  As^^iiun,  for  the  purposes  of  order 
and  religion,  many  of  the  practices  of  Conventual 
life.  She  has  remarked  to  tlie  writer,  that  the  por- 
tion of  the  "  Disclosures"  relating  to  Conventual 
discipline  is  entirely  borrowed  from  the  habits  to 
v/hich  "  Monk"  was  suhjectod  while  an  inmate  of 
the  Asylum,  it  is  not  tliat  the  truth  is  told,  but 
there  is  not  a  line  which  may  not  be  accounted 
for.  Thus,  at  pa^e  21,  where  mention  is  made  of 
fifty  girls  at  the  Congregational  school,  the  fabri- 
cation will  be  accounted  for  by  stating^  that  there 
were  fifty  girls  at  the  Asyiiim  at  the  time  "Monk" 
entered  it.  At  the  Asylum  aUo,  Holy  water  is 
placed  at  the  doors  of  the  apartments,  and  the  girls 
are  expected  to  use  it.  The  entrance  or  way  to 
the  school-room  of  the  boarders  at  the  Congregation 
it  was  out  of  Monk's  power  to  have  described,  for  she 
never  was  a  boarder  at  the  convent,  and  never  was 
admitted  within  the  building.  Monk,  at  the  age  of 
nine  years,  and  about  tlic  year  1826,  attended  the 
poor-school  of  the  Congregation  for  a  few  months  : 
but  the  poor-school-room  is  entirely  separate  from 
the  convent  proper,  and  the  entrance  to  it  is  imme- 
diately from  the  yard.  Tliere  is  no  "  long  covered 
passage" — no  "  turn  to  the  left ;"  but  there  are 
"  covered  passages  and  turns"  in  the  building  of 
the  Magdalen  Asylum. 

At   page  22,   the  Conventual  establishments   of 
Montreal  are  named,  as, 


34 


First — The  "  Congregational  Nunnery." 

Second — The  "  Blat:k  Nunnery  "  or  Convent  of 
S-ister  "  Bourgcoise." 

Third— The  **  Gr«y  Nunnery." 

The  proper  nppcllations  of  the  convents  are  not 
here  "  disclosed,"  nor  are  they  used  in  any  part  •f 
the  pamphlet.  The  ability  of  the  pretended  ex-nnm 
to  name  or  describe  things  as  they  really  are,  does 
not  show  itself  commensurate  with  the  necessity  of 
doing  so  in  order  to  give  an  appearance  of  truth  to 
hfc^r  "disclosures."  The  correct  names  of  the  con- 
vents are — 

First — "  Congregation  de  Notre  Dame." 

Second— "  Hotel  Dieu." 

Third — "  Hospital  General." 

It  will  be  perceived  that  tho  "  Hotel  Dieu"  cor- 
responds with  the  "  Black  Nunnery,  or  Convent  of 
Sister  Bourgeoise."  The  foundation  for  this  descrip- 
tion is,  that  one  of  the  three  nunneries  is  sometimes 
called  by  the  English  population  the  "  Black  Nun- 
nery," and  that  there  lived,  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, a  pious  lady,  who  went  by  the  name  of  Sis- 
ter Borgeois.     Th3  errors  are  three  in  number; 
the  nunnery  sometimes  called  the  "  Black  Nunnery," 
is  not  the  "  Hotel  Dieu,"  but  the  "  Congregational 
Nunnery  ;"  "  Sister  Bourgeoise"  is  improperiy  writ- 
ten for  "  Sister  Bourgeois  ;"  and  lastly,  the  name  of 
th©  pious  sister  is  associated  with  an  institution  in 
the  foundation  of  which   she  was  nowise  concern- 
ed, and  which,  indeed,  originated  before  her  arrival 
in  Canada.     These  errors  are,  we  grant,  not  im- 
portant in  themselves,  but  unpardonable  in  the  al- 
leged production  of  an  ex-nun  of  the  "  Hotel  Dieu," 
and   point   out   clearly  the   manner  in  which   the 
'•  Disclosures"  have  been  got  up. 


85 


It  is  stated  that  the  charities  of  thn  "  Hotel  Diou" 
nt  of  ^^®  ^^^  insignificant  when  compared  "  with  the  size 

I  of  the  buildings.'*  The  origin  of  this  error  must 
I  be  looked  for  solely  in  the  ijjiiorance  and  malijjnitv 
of  the  prompters  of  the  pretended  witness.  The 
falsehood  is  easily  answered.  The  Hotel  Dieii  con- 
sists of  five  parts,  nearly  eqwal  in  size  ;  of  the?»e, 
three  are  exclusively  devoted  to  public  charity,  and 
the  remaining  two  consist  partly  of  cloisters,  and 
partly  of  apartments  where  articles  for  the  poor  and 
destitute  are  prepared. 

It  is  stated  that  the  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  and 
General  Hospital  have  their  "  common  names  (black 
i  and  grey)  from  the  colours  of  the  dresses  woi*n  by 
1  their  inmates."  The  reason  assigned  is  not  suffi- 
cient to  account  for  the  aforesaid  "  common  names," 
inasmuch  as  the  nuns  of  the  Conjjrcfrjation  also 
wear  the  black  habit.  The  truth  is,  that  the  nuns 
of  the  Congregation  and  the  nuns  of  the  General 
Hospital  have  establishments  out  of  tlie  city,  which 
is  not  the  case  with  the  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu ; 
and  in  the  neighbourhood  of  those  establishmenti? 
they  are  sometimes  distinguished  as  "  black  and 
grey  nuns."  It  may  still  further  be  observed,  that 
the  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  nev^er  leave  the  precincta 
of  their  convent ;  whereas,  both  the  nuns  of  the 
Congregation  and  of  the  General  Hospital  may  fre- 
quently be  seen  in  the  streets,  and  the  citizens  aro 
thus  led  to  distinguish  them  by  <he  colour  of  their 
dresses. 

It  is  stated  at  page  23,  that "  in  all"  large  quan- 
tities of  various  ornaments  are  made  by  the  nuns, 
which  are  exposed  for  sale  in  the  ornament  rooms, 
and  afford  large  pecuniary  receipts  every  year, 
which  contribute  much  to  their  incomes.     In  these 


1) 


SO 


rooms,  visitors  oflten  purchase  such  things  as  please 
them  from  some  of  the  old  confidential  nuns  M'ho 
have  the  charge  of  them.     At  the  Magdalen  Asy- 
lum there  is  a  room  in  which  ornamental  and  other 
articles  made  by  the  girls  are  exhibited  to  visitors. 
The  "  Goniidential  nuns"  at  the  Asylum,  are  girls  in 
whom  Mrs.  McDonell  is  induced  to  place  confidence 
from  having  observed  their  advancement  in  mo- 
rality.    It  is  true,  that  at  one  time  articles  of  fancy 
were  made  at  the  convents,  but  those  articles  were 
produced  for  sale  in  the  sick  wards,  and  the  products 
expended  in  procuring  additional  comforts  for  the 
sick  and  infirm.     The  sale  was  confined  to  stran- 
gers, and,  as  may  readily  be  imagined,  was  trifling. 
The  custom  is  now  dropped,  and  the  nuns  have  sa- 
crificed  their  "  large  pecuniary  receipts"    to    the 
more  important  objects  of  peace  and  freedom  from 
impertinence. 

It  is  stated  at  page  30,  that  among  the  nuns  of 
the  Congregation  there  is  a  certain  Saint  Patrick, 
**  an  old  woman  for  a  nun"  (that  is,  about  forty) 
with  quite  a  beard."  The  only  truth  in  this  is, 
that  Saint  Patrick  is  the  Conventual  name  of  one 
of  the  sisterhood  ;  the  talent  of  the  witness  has  ex- 
panded it  into  a  falsehood.  Saint  Patrick  is  now 
(1836)  in  her  twenty-seventh  year ;  and  unfortunate- 
ly for  the  description,  has  as  yet  betrayed  no  ap. 
pearance  of  a  *'  beard." 

As  wc  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  the  date  of 
Monk's  vision  of  the  '•  age"  and  "  beard"  of  Saint 
Patrick,  we  cannot  fix  upon  her  age  at  the  time  her 
appearance  on  the  stage  of  horrors  is  "  disclosed." 
Monk,  it  is  stated,  was  at  school  when  Saint  Patrick 
was  "an  old  woman  for  a  nun  ;"  but  was  this  five 
or  ten  years  ngo,  no  reader  of  the  "Disclosures" 


ll 


n 


from 


4 


1 


^?i 


may  say.     In  the  meantime  the  "  old  woman"  ia 
now  in  her  twenty-seventh  year  ! 

At  page  30  it  is  stated  that  the  pupils  "  were  al. 
lowed  to  enter  only  a  few  of  the  rooms  in  the  Con- 
gregational nunnery,  although  it  was  not  consider, 
ed  one  of  the  secluded  convents."  A  "secluded 
convent"  is  one  which  the  inmates  never  leave, 
and  there  is  only  one  of  the  kind  in  Montreal,  al- 
though the  authors  of  the  "  Disclosures,"  with  their 
usual  disregard  of  accuracy,  intimate  that  there  are 
several.  Monk's  acquaintance  with  a  "secluded 
convent"  was  formed  at  the  Asylum.  The  "  veil- 
ed nuns,"  so  mysteriously  mentioned  throughout 
the  "  Disclosures,"  are  nothing  more  than  "  nuns." 
All  nuns  wear  veils.  The  nuns  of  the  three  con- 
vents at  Montreal  never  wear  their  veils  over  the 
face.  The  poor  of  the  city  are  as  familiar  with 
their  coimtenanccs  as  they  are  witli  their  good 
deeds. 

It  is  stated  (page  34)  that  Monk,  on  the  day  she 
commenced  her  noviciate,  was  introduced  among 
ahout  "  forty  novices."  There  are  mnnces  at  the 
Hotel  Dieu  ;  so  mucli  for  the  truth  ;  but  Monk  has 
expanded  three  or  four  (there  are  seldom  more, 
and  more  frequently  less)  into  the  enormous  num. 
ber  of  "  forty."  With  a  supply  of  forty  novices, 
and  an  annual  creation  of  forty  nuns,  or  even 
twenty,  the  five  part^  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  would 
speedily  become  insuflicient  for  the  accommodation, 
of  the  sisterhood.  The  superior  informed  the  vast 
assemblage,  "  that  a  new  novice  had  come,  and  she 
desired  any  present,  who  might  have  known  her  in 
the  world,  to  signify  it."  Novices  are  taken 
from  the  class  of  "  postulantes,"  and  not  immediate, 
ly  from  the  ♦*  World  ;"  and  the  alleged  inquiry  is 

4 


38 


one  generally  made  at  the  Magdalen  Asylum. 
There  the  girls  are  forbidden  to  converse  on  the 
events  of  their  past  lives,  and  obedience  in  this 
particular  is  specially  enjoined  on  those  who  may 
have  been  acquaintances  before  entering  the  Asy- 
lum. "  Two  Miss  Fougnees,  and  a  Miss  Howard  from 
Vermont,  who  had  been  rjy  fellow-pupils  in  the 
Congregational  nunnery,  immediately  recognized 
me."  Were  we  dealing  with  a  bold  and  able  im- 
postor, whose  pen  "disclosed"  recitals  contrived 
with  skill  and  sustained  by  ingenious  allegations, 
the  task  of  refutation  might  be  difficult,  and  even 
with  some,  smitten  with  the  attraction  of  details 
of  Conventual  debauchery,  ineffectual ;  but  wc  are 
spared  the  pain  of  contemplating  possible  failure 
wherever  this  reply  is  read.  Much  as  the  band  of 
fanatics  who  have  ushered  the  "  Awfid  Disclosures" 
into  the  world  under  the  sanction  of  religion,  have 
committed  themselves  in  other  particulars,  it  is  in 
our  power  to  give  to  their  infamy  still  deeper 
dye.  They  must  have  been  rendeiuu  insane  by 
the  instigations  of  their  own  malice,  or  they  would 
never  have  ventured  to  adduce  real  personages  in 
support  of  the  "  Disclosures."  They  have,  how- 
ever, actually  done  so,  and  their  enormous  fabrica- 
tion  concerning  the  individuals  mentioned  in  the 
passage  just  quoted  would,  in  itself,  be  sufficient  to 
prove  the  falsehood  of  the  whole  narrative.  We 
shall  commence  by  admitting,  as  the  foundation 
of  the  falsehood  of  the  pretended  novice,  that  there 
are  three  persons  living,  whose  names  resemble 
those  given  in  the  "  Disclosures,"  and  that  Monk 
was  personally  known  to  them.  The  falsehoods  are 
startling.  Neither  "Miss  Howard"  nor  the  two  "Miss 
Fougnees"  were  at  any  time  fellow-pupils  of  Monk 


»> 


39 


at  the  Congregation ;  two  of  the  three  have  not  at 
any  time  been  inmates  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  either  aa 
novices  or  otherwise,  nor  have  they  any  knowledge 
or  information  of  Monk's  stay  there,  except  from 
her  published  narrative.  The  acquaintance  of 
Monk  with  Miss  Fourneer  (not "  Fougnee")  and  her 
sister  commenced  and  ended  at  the  Magdalen  Asy- 
lum, where  those  two  young  persons  were  engaged 
as  assistants  to  Mrs.  McDoncll.*  "  Miss  Howard 
from  Vermont"  knew  nothing  of  Monk  previously 
to  the  entrance  of  the  latter  into  the  Asylum.  She 
never  has  been  within  the  wails  of  a  convent,  and 
during  several  months  of  hourly  intercourse  with 
Monk,  never  heard  the  latter  pretend  that  she  had 
been  at  any  period  of  her  life  an  inmate  of  a  con- 
vent. We  have  deemed  it  right  to  procure  docu- 
mentary evidence  on  these  points,  which  shall  be 
produced  in  its  proper  place.  We  had  forgotten 
to  state  that  her  alleged  application  to  Father 
Rocque,  mentioned  at  the  commencement  of  the 
third  chapter,  is  a  positive  invention.  We  know 
from  Father  Rocque  that  he  has  never  seen  or  con- 
versed with  Maria  Monk.  The  miserable  beings 
who  vouch  for  this  woman's  veracity,  may  indeed 
reject  the  testimony  of  a  venerable  old  man  be- 
cause he  happens  to  be  a  "  popish  priest,"  but  in- 
dependently of  it,  her  account  contains  some  notori- 
ous untruths.  It  is  stated  that  "  Father  Rocque" 
succeeded  *'  Father  Roue"  as  superior  of  the 
seminary,  and  was  superior  at  the  time  of  her  ap- 
plication. These  statements  are  untrue.  Mr. 
Quiblier  succeeded  "  Father  Roux,"  not  Roue,  as  su- 

*The  elder  Miss  Foumier  had  been  a  novice  at  the  Hotel  Dieu, 
but  never  took  the  vows.  Monk's  acquaintance  with  this  fact 
enabled  her  to  add  to  her  vocabulary  the  word  "novice." 


40 


perior  of  the  seminary.  The  time  of  iVIonk*s  pre- 
tended appHcation  to  Mr.  Rocque  is,  as  usual,  not 
mentioned,  but  we  can  say  that  that  clergyman 
never  has  been  at  any  time  superior  of  the  semi- 
nary. 

The  information  of  Monk  on  the  seminary  itself 
is  such  as  might  be  expected  from  a  woman  of  her 
class.     "  It  is  the  general  rendezvous  and  centre  of 
all  the  priests  in   the   district  of  Montreal,  and,  I 
have  been  told,  supplies  all  the  country  wiih  priests 
as  far  down  as  Three  Rivers,  which  place  is,  I  be- 
lieve, under  the  charge  of  the  seminary  of  Quebec. 
About  one  hundred  and  fifty  priests  are  connected 
with  that  of  Montreal,  rs  every  small  place  has  one 
priest,  and  a  number  of  larger  ones  have  two."  The 
untruths  are  nearly  as  numerous  as  the  words.  The 
seminary  is  not  a  "  general  rendezvous  ;"  it  does 
not  supply  the  district  with  priests.  The  seminary 
is  a  corporation,  enjoying  the    ministration  of  the 
parish  of  Mo  itreal,  and  has  only  one  mission,  to 
the  lake  of  Two  Mountains.  The  number  of  priests 
connected  with  the  seminary  is  not  one  hundred 
and  fifty,  either   for  the  reason  assigned  in   the 
"  Disclosures  ?"  or  for  any  other.     The  number  of 
priests  connected  with  the  seminary  seldom  exceeds 
thirty.     We  need  not  say,  that  on  all  these  points 
nuns  are  well   informed.     At  page  34,  we  find  in 
the  mention  of  "  Saint  Clotilde,"  a  falsehood,  which 
is  repeated  time  over  time  throughout  the  pamphlet. 
Let  it  be  remembered  that  it  is  an  ex-nun  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu  who  speaks,  and  let  it  be  remarked  that 
she  every  where  speaks  of  her  companions  in  that 
hospital  and  convent  as  being  distinguished  by  the 
names  of  saints  taken  from  the  Catholic  calendar. 
Each  instance  is  a  falsehood,  and  we  here  place  be- 


as 

yoi 

Mi 

an^ 
foi 
w< 


41 


m 


pre- 

not 

man 

lemi- 


fore  the  reader  the  origin  of  it.  The  nuns  of  the 
Congregation  generally  assume  the  names  of  saints, 
and  also  at  the  Hotel  Dieu  tho  names  of  saints  are 
placed  distinct  to  the  eye  over  the  beds  of  the  pa- 
tients. On  this  foundation  some  gentleman  in 
black,  with  elongated  visage  and  sanctimonious  air, 
visiting  the  latter  institution  in  search  of  sin  under 
the  coverlids  of  disease,  has  raised  the  fancied  su- 
perstructure which  it  is  now  our  business  to  de- 
stroy. With  two  exceptions,  there  are  no  "  Saints" 
at  the  Hotel  Dieu,  and  the  nuns  are  collectively 
named  as  "  Soeurs  St.  Joseph,"  or  sisters  of  St. 
Joseph,  and  individually  after  their  baptismal  and 
family  appellations.  It  is  customary  for  two  of 
the  sisters  to  assume  the  names  of  St.  Joseph  and 
St.  Augustin,  the  patron  saints  of  the  convent. 
Tlie  sister  wuo  bore  the  name  of  Saint  Joseph,  died 
about  three  years  since  ;  and  at  the  present  time 
there  is  only  one  sister  who  is  distinguished  by  a 
saint's  name.  Had  Maria  Monk  been  at  anytime 
a  nun  at  the  Hotel  Dieu,  she  would  have  been 
known  as  "  Sister  Maria  Monk,"  or,  more  briefly, 
as  "  Sister  Monk."  "  Clotilde"  is  the  name  of  the 
younger  Miss  Fournier,  and  it  was  usual  at  the 
Magdalen  Asylum  to  style  her  "  St.  Clotilde." 

At  pages  36  and  37,  a  girl  named  Jane  McCoy, 
and  an  "  old  nun"  named  Jane  Ray,  are  mentioned 
for  the  first  time.  Perfect  madness  !  These  two 
women  are  reformed  prostitutes,  and  were  inmates 
of  the  Magdalen  Asylum  contemporaneously  with 
Maria  Monk.  Our  remarks  on  the  unparalleled 
impudence  and  imbecility  of  the  advisers  of  Monk 
in  bringing  forward  the  names  of  real  persons  to 
substantiate  the  **  Disclosures,"  apply  here  with 
peculiar  force*  We  have  taken  the  trouble  to  count 


42 


the  pages  of  the  "  Disclosures"  occupied  with  the 
sayings  and  doings  of  this  "  Jane  Ray,"  and  we 
find  them  to  amount  in  number  to  forty-six.  Forty - 
six  pages  of  falsehood  so  easily  refuted  !  Forty-six 
pages  of  falsehood  met  by  the  incontestable  facts 
that  Jane  Ray  never  was  an  inmate  of  the  Hotel 
Dieu  ;  that  Jane  Ray  is  a  reformed  prostitute,  that 
she  has  been  for  years  living  at  the  Magdalen  Asy- 
lum, and  that  her  sole  acquaintance  with  Monk 
was  formed  during  the  stay  of  the  latter  at  the 
Asylum  !  We  freely  confess  that  it  is  more  easy  to 
admit  scandal  than  to  extirpate  it  after  it  has  been 
received ;  but  we  put  it  to  the  consciences  of  the 
most  simple-minded,  if,  Jifter  this  exposure  of  the 
origin  of  the  "  Disclosures,"  they  can  retain  for 
them  a  particle  of  credulity. 

The  falsehoods  concerning  Monk's  re-admission 
to  the  noviciate,  mentioned  at  page  47,  are  so  inter- 
woven in  the  narrative,  that  it  is  difficult  to  separate 
them.  In  fact,  everv  word  is  a  lie.  We  shall  en- 
deavour  to  enumerate  the  more  flagrant  of  them. 
It  will  be  seen  by  referring  to  the  narrative,  that 
she  states  that  "  money  is  usually  required  for  th© 
admission  of  novices ;"  that  she  paid  money  for  her 
re-admission ;  aiwl  that  she  robbed  her  mother  of 
thirty  dollars,  by  applying  for  her  pension  to  the 
brigade  Major.  The  only  foundation  for  these  lies 
is,  that  nuns,  before  taking  the  veil,  are  required,  by 
a  law  that  cannot  be  suspended  or  put  aside,  to  pay 
into  the  treasury  of  the  convent,  for  charitable  pur- 
poses, the  sum  of  three  thousand  francs,  or  about 
five  hundred  and  sixty  dollars.  The  reader  will 
look  in  vain  for  any  evidence,  for  any  pretence,  that 
such  sum  was  paid  by  Monk.  As  we  have  before 
observed,  the  mother  of  Monk  is  in  the  receipt  of 


43 


the 


wages,  not  of  a  "  pension"  properly  so  called ;  and  we 
now  add  that  such  pens?"  j,  if  onjoyed,  could  not  have 
been  received  by  the  dac^hter  nor  paid  by  a  brigade 
major.  The  law  regulates  such  matters  differently ; 
moreover  there  is  no  such  officer  as  brigade  major 
stationed  at  Montreal.  The  origin  of  this  lie  is 
easily  traced.  Until  recently,  the  town  major  of 
Montreal  had  the  use  and  occupation  of  the  govern- 
ment house  where  Monk's  mother  was  employod  as 
a  domestic.  This  was  tiie  case  when  Monk  and 
her  paramour,  the  repudiated  clergyman,  were  in 
Montreal,  We  cannot  hope  to  disturb  any  honest 
man's  belief  that  such  vile  creatures  as  Maria  Monk 
and  her  crew  may  have  robbed  and  stolen ;  but  we 
think  that  reformed  sinners,  whether  hatched  in  the 
purlieus  of  vice  and  sensuality,  or  in  the  conventi- 
cles of  bastard  sectarianism,  should  give  to  their  self- 
condemnations  at  least  the  appearance  of  truth. 

At  page  48  it  is  stated,  that  "  one  of  her  cousins 
from  Lachine,  named  Reed,  spent  about  a  fortnight 
with  her,"  and  that  the  "  bold  young  novice"  was 
dismissed  for  indecorous  language.  The  only  foun- 
dation for  these  falsehoods  is,  that  there  is  a  girl 
named  "  Reed"  with  whom  Monk  was  acquainted ; 
but  Reed  never  was  an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu. 
Reed  was  an  inmate  of  the  Magdalen  Asylum  con- 
temporaneously with  Maria  Monk.  Independently 
of  this,  the  lie  is  awkwardly  composed.  It  is  first 
stated  that  she  is  a  visitor,  and  a  few  lines  lower 
down  shtf  is  transformed  into  a  novice.  The  parts 
of  the  lie  are  badly  odjusted.  The  inventors  of 
these  noviciates  knew  not  of  the  class  of  posttilanteSf 
from  which  all  novices  must  be  taken,  lieed  is 
unceremoniously  made  a  novice,  in  a  manner  which 
itself  betrays  the  falsehood  of  the  narrative. 


44 


It  is  contrary  to  the  rules  and  practice  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu  Hospital  and  Convent  to  give  admis- 
sion into  anv  of  the  three  classes  into  which  its  in- 
mates  are  divided,  unless  the  applicant  have  pre- 
viously received  the  sacrament  of  confirmation.  If 
Ihis  is  true  respecting  the  lowest  class,  that  of  pos- 
tidantes,  it  is  so  a  fortiori  of  the  class  of  novices,  of 
which  Monk  states  she  was  a  member  at  the  time 
she  was  confirmed.  The  only  foundation  that  ap- 
pears to  exist  for  Monk's  descriptions  of  her  partici- 
pation in  Catholic  ceremonies  and  Catholic  obser- 
vances, is,  that  at  some  periods  of  her  hypocritical 
life  she  put  on  the  guise  of  a  member  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church,  and  in  that  guise  '^ecame  acquaint- 
ed with  some  of  its  rites.  We  presume  that  it  will 
not  be  disputed,  that,  even  if  all  other  points  be  ne- 
glected or  passed  over,  the  Catholicism  at  least  of 
girls  received  into  an  establishment  such  as  the  Ho- 
tel Dieu,  must  be  undoubted.  There  is  not  the 
slightest  reason  to  believe,  either  from  the  narrative 
or  from  any  other  source,  that  Monk  could  have 
proved,  or  that  she  undertook  to  prove,  her  conver- 
sion to  the  Roman  Catholic  faitii.  By  the  canons 
of  the  church,  which  are  strictly  observed  in  Canada, 
a  convert  to  Catholicism  is  required  to  submit  to 
two  acts,  namely,  of  conditional  baptism  and  of  ab- 
juration, and  those  acts  are  regularly  registered  at 
the  places  where  they  arc  ma^le.  In  the  case  of 
Monk,  it  is  not  "  disclosed'*  in  what  year  or  by 
whom  she  was  instructed  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
faith — at  what  place  or  into  whose  hands  she  made 
her  abjuration — or  who  were  the  witnesses  of  it ;  by 
whom,  on  what  day,  or  at  what  placp.  she  received 
baptism,  under  condition,  agreeably  to  the  rites  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  church.  On  all  those  points  the 


tl 

fa 
c^ 

P] 


45 


IS- 

in- 

re- 

If 


narrative  is  silent.  The  deficiency  cannot  be  sup- 
plied  without  further  fabrication,  which  we  should 
think  this  ex]>o6ure  will  deter  the  boldest  of  Monk'n 
advisers  from  resorting  to. 

Before  dismissing  the  subject  of  Monk's  pretend- 
ed confirmation,  we  shall  make  two  quotations  con- 
cerning it  /rom  the  "Disclosures."  She  states, 
that  "  on  the  day  she  went  to  the  church  to  be 
confirmed,  her  conscience  troubled  her !"  She  then 
describes  the  ceremony  after  her  fashion,  and  con- 
cludes by  saying,  that  "  she  went  home  with  qualms 
of  conscience."  Maria  Monk's  conscience!  We 
infer  from  the  language  of  the  narrative,  that  she 
went  from  the  Hotel  Dieu  to  a  church  to  be  con- 
rtrmed  ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  ceremony  was 
not  performed  at  the  chapel  of  the  convent;  and 
also,  that  after  the  ceremony  she  returned  to  her 
mother's  house  (see  page  31 ),  where  the  word  "  home" 
is  expressly  used  in  this  sense,  which,  indeed,  is  the 
most  obvious  and  proper.  Now,  it  will  be  recol- 
lected that  the  nuns,  novices,  and  po^tulantes  of 
the  Hotel  Dieu,  never  leave  the  precincts  of  the  Hos. 
pital  and  Convent  for  any  purpose  whatsoever. 
Thus  the  story  of  Monk's  pretended  confirmation  is 
falsehood  running  into  falsehood,  and  so  clumsily 
constructed,  that  in  whatever  light  it  be  viewed,  it 
presents  still  the  same  ugly  aspect  of  forgery. 

We  are  informed  by  Mrs.  McDonell,  that  Monk 
**  disclosed"  to  her  a  story  of  confirmation  in  lan- 
guage resembling  that  used  in  the  narrative,  but  of 
course  never  dared  to  pretend  that  she  was  a  no- 
vice, either  at  the  time  of  such  confirmation  or  at 
any  other.  She  declared  to  Mrs.  McDonell  that 
she  was  confirmed  at  St.  Denis,  in  the  church  there 
{administered  by  Mr.  Bedard.     She  also  mentioned 


46 


that  she  had  concealed  some  sin  from  Mr.  Bedard 
at  confession,  which  excited  in  her  the  "  qualms  of 
conscience." 

Tlie  ceremony  of  taking  the  veil  is  "  disclosed" 
with  much  circumstance  and  detail.  It  is  in  our 
power  to  say,  that  not  Monk  nor  any  one  else  has 
ever  acted  a  part  in  such  a  scene  as  is  described  by 
her  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  "  Disclosures."  The 
origin  of  the  falsehoods  must  be  looked  for  in  the 
information  of  the  parties  to  them.  That  there  is  5, 
ceremony  performed  at  the  taking  of  the  veil, 
this  alone  is  true;  all  else  is  positively  and  no- 
toriously false.  We  shall  quote  from  the  "  Dis- 
closures" only  two  passages  concerning  this  pre- 
tended ceremony.  At  page  53  it  is  stated,  "  tak- 
ing the  veil  is  an  affair  which  occurs  so  frequently 
in  Montreal,  that  it  has  long  ceased  to  be  regarded 
as  a  novelty  ;  and  although  notice  had  been  given 
in  the  French  parish  church  as  usual,  only  a  small 
audience  have  assembled,  as  I  have  mentioned." 

Were  Monk's  assertion  made  at  page  34,  that  she 
was  introduced  among  forty  novices,  founded  in  truth, 
it  might  readily  be  inferred,  that  "  taking  the  veil 
is  an  aff^air  which  occurs  frequently  at  Montreal." 
The  concordance  between  the  two  statements  pre- 
sents one  of  the  very  few  instances  of  consistency 
to  be  met  with  in  the  course  of  the  narrative.  Tho 
truth  however  is,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  that 
the  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  Hospital  and  convent 
are  few  in  number,  and  that  the  novices  seldom 
exceed  three  or  four.  We  now  add,  that  the  nuns 
of  the  Hotel  Dieu  and  the  nuns  of  the  Congre- 
gation in  Montreal  are  the  only  nuns  who  go 
through  the  ceremony  of  taking  the  veil  in  pub- 
lic ;  and  that  the  ceremony  is  regarded  by  the  citi* 


M 

ai 
ol 
01 

^\l 
U 


47 


zens  as  a  great  novelty,  and  is  always  numerously 
attended.  The  second  member  of  the  sentence 
states  that  notice  of  the  ceremony  is  usually  given 
in  the  "  French  parish  church."  Not  only  is  it  false 
that  such  notice  is  "  usually  given,"  but  in  fact  it  is 
never  given,  and  most  certainly  was  not  given  on 
the  occasion  of  Monk's  pretended  reception.  Of 
the  thousands  who  frequent  the  parish  church,  not 
one  will  be  found  to  say  that  the  name  of  "  Maria 
Monk"  has  ever  been  sounded  from  the  pulpit  of 
that  building. 

At  pag/?  54  we  find  the  following  "  disclosure ;" 
"  After  taking  the  vows,  I  proceeded  to  a  small 
apartment  behind  the  altar,  accompanied  by  four 
nuns,  where  was  a  coffin  prepared  with  my  nun 
name  engraven  upon  it," 

"Saint  Eustace." 

"  My  companions  lifted  it  by  four  handles  attach- 
ed to  it,  while  I  threw  otf  my  dress  and  put  on  that 
of  a  nun  of  Sctur  (sister)  Bourgeoise"  (again  incor- 
rectly written  for  "  Bourgeois.") 

Is  it  necessary  to  say  that  there  is  no  such 
coffin  ?  Will  the  reader  please  to  observe  that 
*  the  disclosure"  just  quoted  conveys  two  asser- 
tions resting  on  the  personal  evidence  of  the  woman 
Monk  ;  namely,  that  the  "  nun  name"  of  *'  Saint 
Eustace"  was  bestowed  on  her  at  her  reception, 
and  that  on  the  same  occasion  she  put  on  the  habit 
of"  Sister  Bourgeoise  ;"  and  will  he  then  turn  to 
our  previous  remarks  on  these  two  points  ?  Ho 
will  instantly  see  that  it  was  impossible  for  the  pre- 
tended ex-nun  to  have  assumed  or  received  the 
"  nun  name"  of  "  Saint  Eustace,"  for  such  names 
never  have  been  assumed  by  the  nuns  of  the  Hotel 
Dieu  Hospital  and  convent,  with  the  exceptions  al- 


49 


ready  mentioned ;  and   he  will   also  see,  that  the 
**  putting  on  the  dress  of  Sister  Bourgeoise"  was 
equally  impossible  to  the  pretended  ex-nun,  inas- 
much as  Sister  Bourgeois,  (not  Bourgeoise,)  of  pious 
memory,  belonged  to  another  and  entirely  distinct 
institution,  of  which  she  was  the  founder  ;  that  she 
was  in  no  manner  connected   with  the  Hotel  Diou ; 
and  that  the  nuns  of  the  latter  foundation  are  sis- 
ters  of  St.  Josepli.     The   reader   may  then  ponder 
at  will  on  the  authenticity  and  verisimilitude  of  the 
artless  "  Disclosure's"  of  the  pretended  ex-nun.  We 
must  state  here,  that  the   laws  of  the  province   of 
Canada  regulate    the  acceptation  of  the  religious 
habit  and  interfere  therein.  By  those  laws  it  is  requir- 
ed that  an  instrument  shall  be  drawn  up  and  exe- 
cuterl.  wherein  the  voluntary  co-operation   of  the 
new  nun  shall  be  set  forth,  together  with  other  cere- 
monies  appertaining  to  lier  reception.     The  deed 
must  be  signed  by  a  notary  and  competent  witnesses. 
Need  we  say  that  no  vsuch  deed  concerning  Monk 
is  in  existence  ? 

At  page  61,  the  falsehood  concerning  her  "  new 
name"  is  repeated.  She  found  it  inscribed  on  a 
certain  "  band"  at  the  dinner  table.  The  pretend- 
ed details  of  conventual  life  given  at  this  part  of  the 
narrative,  are  all  borrowed  from  Monk's  experience 
gained  at  the  Magdalen  Asylum.  There  the  dinner 
hour,  for  instance,  is  eleven  ;  and  a  band  or  ticket, 
with  the  "  owner's  name"  marked  on  it,  "  is  fasten- 
ed to  the  napkin."  The  napkin  of  the  pretended 
ex-nun  bore  the  inscription  of  "  M?ria  Monk." 

Father  Dufresne,  mentioned  at  page  62  in  a  way 
that  marks  the  atrocious  intentions  of  the  advisers 
of  "  Monk,"  is  a  clergyman,  justly  venerated  for  his 
benevolence    and    indefatigable  exertions  in   the 


m 


cl 
ti 


49 


#^ 


duties  of  his  calling.  He  has  been  for  years  the 
♦Viend  of  Mrs.  McDonell,  and  has  advised  and  as- 
sisted that  lady  in  the  conduct  of  the  Magdalen 
Asylum  from  its  commencement.  At  the  Asylum 
he  once  spoke  with  Maria  Monk,  an  occurrence 
which  minds  prolific  of  calunmy  have  expanded  in- 
to a  disgusting  outrage. 

The  "  daily  ceremonies"  described  in  the  seventh 
chapter  of  the  "  Disclosures,"  are  taken  from 
Monk's  remembrance  of  what  she  saw  practised  at 
the  Asylum.  Her  remiiiioCcjnces  are,  however,  more 
frequently  inaccurate  than  otherwise.  The  words 
in  French  are  used  at  the  Asylum ;  the  prayers 
spoken  of  are  said  there.  There  is  also  a  com- 
munity room  in  which  the  nuns  are  daily  assem- 
bled ;  but  reformed  "  popish  priests"  may  be  able  to 
certify,  that  in  convents  there  is  only  one  apartment 
«tyled  a  "  Community  room."  It  takes  its  name 
from  the  use  made  of  it,  and  is  called  in  French 
"  chambre  de  la  communaute,"  or  "  room  of  the 
community."  Monk's  narrative  creates  for  the 
Hotel  Dieu  dozens  of  such  apartments.  The  error 
of  the  pretended  ex-nun  is  foolish  and  unnecessary 
for  the  purposes  of  the  "  Disclosures." 

"  Benissante,"  prominently  printed  at  page  68, 
is  an  amusing  transformation  of  the  two  first  words 
of  a  well-known  catholic  hymn, "  Veni  Sancte  ;"  this 
hymn  is  daily  sung  at  the  Asylum. 

What  follows  is  extracted  from  page  81  of  the 
"  Disclosures,"  and  affords  a  pretty  specimen  of  the 
consistency  of  the  penny-a-liners.  "  The  Congrega- 
tional Nunnery  was  founded  by  a  nun  called  sister 
Bourgeoise.  She  taught  a  school  in  Montreal,  and 
left  property  for  the  foundation  of  a  convent.  Her 
body  is  buried,  and  her  heart  is  kept  under  the 

5 


50 


nunnery  in  an  iron  chest,  which  has  been  shown  to 
me,  with  tlie  assurance  that  it  continues  in  perfect 
preservation,  although  she  has  been  dead  more  than 
one  hundred  and  fifty  years.  In  the  chapel  is  the 
foHowing  inscription  :  *  Soeur  Bourgeoise,  Fonda- 
trice  du  Couvent,' — '  Sister  Bourgeoise,  Founder  of 
the  Convent.' "  Tlie  only  truth  in  this  piece  of  tattle 
is,  that  tiie  Congregational  nunnery  was  founded 
hy  a  sister  Bourgeois  (not  Bourgeoise.)  The  pas- 
sage makes  a  strange  appearance  in  the  "  Awful 
Disclosures,"  for  it  has  no  connection  with  what 
immediately  precedes  or  succeeds.  It  would  seem 
to  have  been  inserted  by  some  malicious  spirit,  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  tiic  authors  to  utter  confu- 
sion. As  it  is,  compare  the  admission  there  made, 
that,  the  Congregational  nunnery  was  founded  by 
sister  Bourgeois<\  (Bourgeois,)  with  two  statements 
which  we  have  already  noticed.  At  page  22  the 
Hotel  Dieu  is  designated  as  the  convent  of  sister 
"  Bourgeoise,"  (Bourgeois,)  and  at  page  54  the  nuns 
of  the  Hotel  Dieu  are  designated  as  the  nuns  of 
"  Sister  Bourgeois  !"  Further  comment  on  this  point 
is  unnecessary.  The  pretended  ex-nun  has  the 
"  assurance"  to  say,  that  she  was  shown  "  an  iron 
chest  under  the  nunnery,  in  which  the  body  of  the 
sister  is  buried  and  her  heart  is  kept."  Monk  was 
never  shown  such  "chest,"  for  none  such  exists. 
Even  the  mere  and  simple  laity  of  Montreal  know 
better  than  this  pretended  ex-nun  how  the  remains 
of  sister  Bourgeois  were  disposed  of.  The  following  is 
a  translation  of  the  only  inscription  which  exists 
concerning  the  sister  Bourgeois.  The  inscription 
itself  may  be  read  in  the  conventual  chapel,  which 
is  not  "  under  the  nunnerv,"  but  beside  it. 

"  Here,  in  this  small  leaden  chest,  is  inclosed  a 


p¥ 


51 


m 


(led 


ti'5 


silver  box  in  the  form  of  a  heart,  which  contains 
the  remains  of  that  of  the  venerable  sister,  Mar- 
garet Bourgeois,  instructress  of  the  community  of 
the  Congregation  of  our  Lady  in  Canada,  deceased 
the  12th  January,  1700.  Her  body  had  at  first 
been  interred  in  the  chapel  belonging  to  the  sisters 
in  the  parish  of  Montreal,  from  which  place  her 
bones  have  been  transferred  into  this  church  in 
1766.  They  repose  in  the  sanctuary,  interred 
against  the  wall  on  the  left  side  of  the  altar.  Her 
heart,  a  year  after  her  death,  had  been  solemnly  de- 
posited in  this  chapel,  and  subsequently,  having  been 
in  part  spared  by  t-lie  flames  of  the  fire  of  1768,  was 
there  replaced  the  30th  June,  1782." 

Monk  was  at  the  poor  school  of  the  congregation 
in  her  ninth  year ;  and  her  "  disclosure"  regarding 
the  sister  Bourgeois  is  an  imperfect  reminiscence 
of  that  early  age. 

At  page  89  and  elsewhere,  nuns  are  mentioned 
as  employed  in  saying  their  "  catechism."  The 
untruth  is  obvious,  for  it  may  readily  be  inferred 
that  nuns  who  undergo  years  of  religious  training 
as  novices  and  posiulantes,  have  no  occasion  to  re- 
peat the  "  catechism"  after  their  reception.  At  the 
Asylum  the  girls  are  taught  the  catechism,  and  the 
practice  there  followed  has  suppHed  Monk  with  a 
reminiscence  for  the  coinage  of  her  untruth 

The  falsehood  concerning  "  nun  names"  is  elab- 
orately repeated  at  page  91.  "I  found  that  I  had 
several  namesakes  among  the  nuns,  for  there  were 
two  others  who  had  already  bore  away  my  new 
name,  saint  Euatace.  This  was  not  a  solitary 
case,  for  there  were  five  saint  Marys  and  three 
saint  Monros,  besides  two  novices  of  that  name." 
We  are  here  informed,  for  the  first  time,  that  even 


52 


novices  assume  the  names  of  "  saints,"  and  though 
not  yet  "  nuns,"  nevertheless  bear  these  pretended 
"nun  names."  These  idle  fabrications  destroy 
each  other.  It  is  previously  stated  that  these  "  nun 
names"  are  conferred  on  the  day  the  ceremony  of 
taking  the  veil  is  performed.  It  is  stated  that  the 
"  new  name"  of  the  new  nun  "  is  found  inscribed 
on  her  coffin !" 

We  can  account  for  the  fabrication  of  the  pre- 
tended "  squaw  nuns,"  mentioned  in  the  ninth  chap- 
ter of  the  "Disclosures."  At  the  Asylum  there 
was,  contemporaneously  with  Monk,  an  Indian  girl, 
the  grand-daughter  of  Thomas  Raco  Suinte,  a  chief 
of  the  "  Sault  St.  Louis."  But  Indians  have  not 
large  sums  of  money  to  pay  for  the  "  admission  of 
their  daughters  into  convents.'^  The  money  paid 
on  the  admission  of  a  nun  is  not  measured  by  weight. 
The  Indians  in  Lower  Canada  live  in  communities, 
and  are  not  allowed  by  law  to  "  sell  their  property." 
The  idea  of  the  pretended  squaw  nun,  "  St.  Hypo- 
lite,"  originated  in  the  circumstance  of  the  elder 
Miss  Fournier  owning  that  name. 

The  story  of  the  "  secret  bell,"  mentioned  at  page 
97,  is  another  reminiscence  of  the  Magdalen  Asy- 
lum. The  buildings  at  the  Asylum  arc  situate  in  a 
yard,  which  separates  them  from  the  lane  leading  to 
the  gate.  The  gate  itself  is  provided  with  a  move- 
able board,  by  means  of  which,  a  person  inside  can 
ascertain  before  opening  who  the  applicant  for  ad- 
mission is.  Outside  the  gate  is  a  "  bell  handle," 
which  is  not  "entirely  concealed."  So  much  for  the 
origin  of  the  fable  of  the  "secret  bell." 

Monk  was  at  St.  Denis  in  the  year  1833  and 
1834,  and  there  may  have  seen  or  heard  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.Bird,  vicar  to  the  Rev,  J.  Baptiste  Bedard,  curate 


i 


53 


lough 

jnded 

stroy 

"nun 

iny  of 

it  the 

;ribed 

e  prc- 
chap- 
there 
-n  girl, 
I  chief 
ve  not 
lion  of 
^  paid 
i^eight. 
mities, 
^erty." 
Hypo- 
elder 


at  page 
Asy. 
ite  in  a 
ding  to 

move- 
de  can 
for  ad- 
andle," 

for  the 

33  and 
he  Rev. 
curate 


of  the  parish.     She  introilu<:e.s  him  at  page  98,  with 
liis  name  transformed  into  "  Bicrze." 

The  names  of  tlie  books  mentioned  at  page  98, 
are  another  reminiscence  of  the  Asvluni,  where 
tliose  books  are  actually  used.  Some  two  or  three, 
however,  of  those  mentioned  have  no  existence. 
Tlie  "  Examcn  de  Conscience"  is  the  title  of  a 
chapter  in  most  C;itholic  prayer-books,  and  to  which 
the  attention  of  Monk  was  frequently  directed  by 
Mrs.  McDonell,  but  there  is  no  hook  of  the  name. 

At  the  commencement  of  the  tenth  chapter  it  is 
stated,  that  the  manufacture  of  wax  was  an  im- 
portant branch  of  business  in  the  nunnery,  and 
that  "  it  was  carried  on  in  a  small  room,  on  the  first 
floor,  thence  called  the  ciergerie,  or  wax-room, 
cicrgc  being  the  French  word  for  tc«a;."  Monk 
would  have  us  believe  that  she  "  was  sometimes 
sent  to  read  to  the  nuns  employed  there."  At  the 
Asylum  the  manufacture  of  wax  tapers  is  a  "  branch 
of  business,"  and  the  room  in  which  the  manufac- 
ture is  carried  on  is  certainly  called  the  ciergerie^ 
though  not  for  the  reason  mentioned  in  the  "  Dis- 
closures," as  cierge  is  not  "  the  French  word  for 
wax."  Monk  was  occasionally  sent  to  read  "  there" 
to  the  girls,  while  at  work.  At  page  109,  Monk 
has  appropriated  to  herself  the  interesting  title  of 
the  "  devout  English  reader,"  of  Jane  Ray's  inven- 
tion ;  but  "  Jane  Ray,"  with  whom  we  have  convers- 
ed, denies  that  she  had  any  knowledge  of  it. 

The  needle  of  Monk  was  sometimes  employed  at 
the  Asylum  in  making  scapularies.  She  describes 
them  in  the  "  Disclosures"  as  having  on  one  side  a 
kind  of  double  cross,  and  on  the  other  I.  H.  S.,  the 
meaning  of  which   she  "  does  not  exactly  know." 

5* 


54 


This  is  not  surprising  in  a  jirustitute.  but  nuns  are 
,  better  informed. 

The  "Disclosures"  make  Messrs.  Bonin,  Rich- 
ards, and  Sauvage,  together  with  the  Bishop,  au- 
thors of,  and  witness  to  the  death  of  "  St.  Francis." 
Mr.  Bonin  succeeded  Mr.  Dufresne  as  religious  ad- 
viser to  Mrs.  McDonell,  and  in  that  capacity  was 
personally  known  to  Monk.  Neither  Mr.  Bonin 
nor  Messrs.  Richards  and  Sauvage,  have  at  any  time 
been  chaplains  to  the  Hotel  Dieu.  The  Bishop 
and  Mr.  Sauvage  have  the  years  of  the  Roman 
Cenci,  but  are  not  reputed  to  resemble  him  in  other 
particulars. 

Mr.  Quiblier,  superior  of  the  Montreal  seminary, 
mentioned  at  page  150  and  elsewhere,  is  a  gentleman 
of  the  highest  character ;  and  yet  we  are  induced 
to  believe,  that  in  some  places,  ar.d  with  some  peo- 
ple, the  word  of  such  a  man  may  be  of  less  weight 
than  that  of  the  thief  and  prostitute.  To  believe 
in  Mr.  Quiblier's  visits  to  the  Hotel  Dicu,  it  is  ne- 
cessary to  introuuce  the  machinery  of  the  "  subter- 
ranean passage."  As  Mr.  Quiblier  never  has  been 
chaplain  to  the  Hotel  Dieu,  they  could  not  have 
hccn  otherwise  paid.  The  belief  in  the  "  suhler- 
ranean  passage"  is  comfortable,  for  it  solves  many 
difficulties.  We  shall  doubtless  distress  many  a  fool 
by  depriving  him  of  it. 

At  page  153  it  is  stated,  that  the  youngest  novice 
who  ever  took  the  veil  *•  was  only  I'ourtecn  years 
of  age."  This  is  an  implied  falsehood.  By  the 
laws  of  Canada,  no  nun  car.  "  take  the  veil"  before 
she  has  attained  the  age  of  sixteen. 

Will  Monk's  story,  related  at  page  154,  induce 
any  one  to  believe,  that  a  Catholic  bishop  and  vicar 
general  of  the  dioccirc  of  Quebec  niav  be  found  on 


i 


55 


"  public  squares"  on  the  diiys  of  executions !  We 
regard  it  as  a  singular  instance  of  timidity,  that  the 
authors  of  the  "  Disclosures"  have  not  invented  for 
the  region  of  Canada  an  ^^Autodafe"  under  the 
superintendence  of  the  bishop  and  his  clergy. 

Visits  of  tlie  bishop  to  the  Hotel  Dieu,  and  his 
participation  in  the  crimes  alleged  to  be  committed 
there,  are  repeatedly  charged  in  tlie  "  Disclosures." 
Now,  when  the  bishop  visits  the  convent  proper,  he 
is  always  dressed  in  his  canonical  robes,  and  is  at- 
tended  by  at  least  two  of  his  clergy.  Such  visits 
are  in  their  nature  public,  and  could  not  be  other- 
wise paid  without  exciting  public  remark.  The 
name  of  the  bishop  is  not  well  known  to  the  ex- 
nun,  for  it  is  written  in  three  or  four  different  ways 
throughout  the  narrative. 

The  story  of  the  "  Saint  Bon  Pasteur,"  introduced 
at  page  160,  is  not  only  evidently  absurd,  but  is  also 
a  singular  instance  of  the  mode  in  which  the  fabri- 
cations of  the  "  Disclosures"  have  originated.  **  Bon 
Pasteur,"  or  the  "  Good  Shepherd,"  is  an  expression 
habitually  used  by  devout  Christians  in  speaking  of 
our  Saviour.  This  expression  was  frequently  in- 
troduced in  the  prayers  daily  recited  at  the  Asylum, 
ind  such  is  the  i)urc  and  siiuple  origin  of  the  fable 
of  the  ''Bon  Pasteur."  In  conversing  with  Mrs. 
McDonell,  she  satisfied  us  fully  on  this  point.  In 
fact,  there  is  not  perliiips  a  single  lie  told  in  the 
"Disclosures,"  for  whicU  a  similar  origin  might  not 
b(^  found.  Thus  the  "  songs"  which  are  interspersed 
ll»roughout  the  "  Disclosures,"  are  catches  which 
were  familiar  to  the  girls  of  the  Asylum. 

A  most  atrocious  charge  is  brought,  at  page  169, 
against  the  whole  body  c^f  priests.  The  mind 
Kickens   in   the    contemplation   of    such   horrible 


56 


calumny.  Our  iiidigntition  against  the  abettors  of 
Monk  in  Iitr  sclicme  of  infamy,  and  the  villany  we 
impute  to  them,  are  more  thtin  jiistiiied.  It  will  be 
better  to  lay  aside  hU  false  delicacy,  and  give  the 
charge  at  once  in  the  proper  words  of  the  narrative. 
"The  priests  are  liable,  by  their  dissolute  habits,  to 
occasional  attacks  of  di.iensc,  which  render  it  ne- 
ccssar}',  or  at  lea;;t  prudent,  to  subujit  to  medical 
treatment."  We  puc  it  to  the  common  sense  of  the 
reader,  if  these  "  occasional  attacks  of  disease"  do 
not  su[)pose  habits  of  promiscuous  debauchery  in 
conunon  rece})tacles  of  sensuality ;  but,  with  such 
habits,  could  the  priests  by  any  possible  pnjcaution 
escape  the  stigma  of  public  opinion  ?  Certainly  not. 
Now  the  priests  of  Montreal  and  of  Canada  do 
enjoy  at  least  public  esteem  for  moralit}^,  and,  if  ne- 
cessary, the  testimony  of  every  adult  in  the  province 
would  be  gladly  yielded  to  their  excellent  character. 
Opposed  to  this  character,  and  its  absolute  incom- 
patibility with  the  charge,  we  have  the  evidence  of 
Monk  delivered  in  the  following  terms.  "  I  am 
able  to  speak  from  personal  knowledge,  for  I  hjlve 
been  a  nun  of  Soiur  IJourgeoise."  A  nun  of  Soeur 
I3ourgeoise  (Bourgeois)  means,  if  any  thing,  a  nun 
of  the  Congregation  ;  a  nun  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  is  a 
**  Socur  de  St.  Joseph;"  but  this  signal  contradic- 
tion, which  we  have  pointed  out  more  than  once  be- 
fore,  was  not  necessary  to  cover  the  calumniators 
with  confusion.  We  have  it  in  our  power  to  show 
that  it  was  in  common  brothels  that  the  wretched 
woman  Monk  made  herself  familiar  with  "occa- 
sional attacks  of  disease  ;"  and  that  it  was  among 
women  of  her  class,  at  a  time  she  alleges  she  was 
an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  she  learned  the  dis- 


1 


r 


JST 


ors  of 

ly  we 

i^ill  be 

e  the 

ativc. 

ity,  to 

it   ne- 

edical 

of  the 

ie"  do 

ery  in 

1  such 

iiution 

ly  not. 

ida  do 

,  if  ne- 

ovincc 

racter. 

incoiu- 

ence  of 

"I  am 

I  have 

f  Soeur 

,  a  nun 

ieu  is  a 

itradic- 

>nce  be- 

niators 

:o  show 

retched 

"  occa- 

among 

he  was 

he  dis- 


tinction  between  prudence  and  necessity  in  submit- 
ting to  medical  treatment. 

Monk  became  acquainted  with  the  name  of 
**  Father  Tombcau"  from  the  circumstance  of  a  re- 
vered clergyman,  bearing  a  name  somewhat  similar, 
having  died  about  the  time  Monk  left  the  Magdalen 
Asvlum.  The  funeral  ceremony  excited  much  at- 
tcntion  at  the  time,  as  the  deceased  was  widely 
known  and  respected.  Notwithstanding  the  charge 
made  in  the  "  Disclosures"  of  Maria  Monk,  the 
charitable  and  Christian  reader  may  believe  that 
the  soul  of  the  good  clergyman  and  faithful  pastor 
"rests  in  peace." 

"  Father  Larkin,"  mentioned  at  page  174,  has 
I  been  for  years  past  a  professor  at  the  Montreal 
college.  Hi^  brother,  a  sub-deacon,  is  also  em- 
ployed there.  Will  it  be  credited,  that  a  gentleman 
so  employed  could  l)y  any  possibility  be  "  on  duty" 
of  any  description  at  the  Hotel  Dieu  Hospital  and 
Convent  ? 

There  is  as  little  truth  in  the  description  given  at 
page  177  of  the  obsequies  of  a  nun,  as  in  that  of 
the  ceremony  of  taking  the  veil.  It  is  stated  that 
"  when  a  Black  nun  is  dead,  the  corpse  is  dressed 
as  if  living,  and  placed  in  the  chapel  in  a  sitting 
posture  within  the  railing  round  the  altar,  with  a 
book  in  the  hand  as  if  reading.  "  A  "  Black  nun," 
or  nun  of  the  foimdation  of  sister  Bourgeois,  is  not 
a  nun  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  Hospital  and  Convent ;  and 
when  a  nun  of  the  latter  institution  dies,  she  is  not 
exhibited  "  with  a  book  in  the  hand."  The  exhi- 
bition is  public,  and  the  information  obtained  by  the 
repudiated  minister  who  accompanied  Monk  from 
Nevv-York  to  Montreal,  has  been  awkwardly  and 
incorrectly  transferred  to  the  pages  of  the  "  Awful 


/ 


58 


Disclosures.*'  The  vows  of  a  nun  of  the  Hotel 
Dicu,  taken  with  the  veil,  arc  always  written  out ; 
retained  ahout  her  person  as  long  as  she  lives  ;  and 
placed  in  her  hand  when  laid  out  in  the  chapel  of 
the  convent.  Arc  tlie  authors  of  the  "  Disclosures" 
prepared  to  say  what  those  vows  are,  or  what  have 
hecome  of  the  recorded  vows  taken  hy  their  wit- 
ness ?  A  ring  is  placed  on  the  linger  of  a  nun  of 
the  Hotel  Dieu  at  the  time  of  her  reception.  That 
ring  is  never  removed,  and  is  huried  with  her.  Arc 
the  authors  of  the  "  Disclosures"  prepared  to  de- 
scribe that  ring  with  the  inscription  thereon?  Can 
they  account  for  the  silence  observed  on  these 
points  by  their  witness?  Can  they  inform  their 
dupes  wliat  has  become  of  the  ring  which  their 
witness  must  have  received  and  worn,  if  their  al- 
legations concerning  her  nunship  are  founded  in 
truth  ? 

By  referring  to  the  "  Disclosures,"  page  178,  it 
will  be  seen  that  it  is  stated  that  the  superior  of 
the  Hotel  Dieu  was  in  the  habit  of  absenting  her- 
self fiom  the  convent,  and  that  it  is  intimated  that 
on  such  occasion  she  would  visit  the  priest's  farm, 
situate  at  some  distance  from  the  city.  The  mani- 
fest fulsehood  of  this  "  disclosure"  will  be  at  once 
perceived,  when  it  is  recollected  that  the  vows  of 
the  nuns  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  bind  them  to  perpetual 
seclusion  within  the  precincts  of  the  hospital  and 
convent ;  and  that  the  existence  of  those  vows  is 
known  to  the  citizens.  No  nun  is  ever  seen  out 
of  the  convent ;  no  nun  would  dare  brave  the  ex- 
posure. It  is  not  even  pretended  that  either  the 
visits  to  the  farm,  or  the  visits  to  the  Conffregation- 
al  Nunnery,  mentioned  at  page  125,  were  secret ! 

Although  Monk  styles  tlic  disappearance  of  tho 


[ 


59 


,j> 


"  old  superior"  one  of  the  "  most  remarkable  and 
unaccountable  things  that  happened  in  the  con- 
vent," it  is  nevertheless  accoimted  for  at  the  very 
page  that  follows,  by  insinuating  that  she  was  mur- 
dered ;  an  occurrence  that  need  not  have  appeared 
at  all  remarkable  to  Maria  Monk.  This  has  been 
elsewhere  noticed :  we  shall  now  state  how  supe- 
riors of  the  Hotel  Dieu  do  sometimes  disappear. 

At  the  expiration  of  every  three  years  a  con- 
ventual chapel  is  h  Id  for  the  piirpose  of  electing  a 
new  suj)erior.  By  the  rules  of  the  ioundation,  the 
same  person  cannot  be  elected  more  tiian  twice  in 
succession,  and  consequently,  at  least  every  six 
years  the  "  old  superior  disapptsirs,"  and  a  new 
superior  takes  her  place.  The  disappearance  is, 
however,  not  total  ;  for  the  "  old  superior"  merges 
into  the  community,  of  which  siie  remains  a  member 
for  life,  unless  re-elected  at  a  subsequciit  period. 
The  election  is  always  certified  by  a  formal  instru- 
ment, as  required  by  law.  The  iiistalliTijr  of  a  new 
superior  is  souiewhat  dilltjrently  described  in  the 
"  disclosures."  There  it  is  staled,  that  **  one  morn- 
ing" the  nuns,  on  their  arrival  in  the  community 
room,  found  tlie  Bishop,  but  "  no  superior ;"  strange 
to  say,  the  Bishop  addresses  the  nuns  "  instead  of 
the  superior,  v.'ho  was  nowhere  to  be  seen."  He  then 
introduces  to  tliem  one  of  the  oldest  nuns.  Saint 
l)u,  "  as  their  superior."  This  cloud  of  nonsense, 
falsehood,  and  foolish  mysteriousness,  {Saint  Du  !) 
may  be  dispersed  in  a  very  few  words.  There 
have  been  two  superiors  since  1821,  and  both  are 
still  hving  at  the  Hotel  Dieu.  The  present  supe- 
rior was  in  office  from  1821  to  1827,  and  was  re- 
elected in  1831),  and  again  in  1836. 

We  quote  the  following  passage  from  page  190. 


—ii^ia* 


60 


:.^>m 


"  One  of  the  most  shocking  stories  I  heard  of  the 
events  that  had  occurred  in  the  nunnery  hefore  my 
acquaintance  with  it,  was  the  following,  which  was 
told  me  by  Jane.  What  is  uncommon,  I  can  fix 
the  date  when  I  heard  it ;  it  was  on  New  Year's 
day,  1834."  Uncommon,  indeed  !  for  it  is  the  only 
date  mentioned  throughout  the  "Disclosures."  Bo 
it  remarked,  however,  that  the  date  does  not  re- 
gard an  exent  concerning  Monk ;  no,  it  merely  re- 
gards the  time  a  story  was  told  her  by  "Jane!" 
"  Jane,"  who  knew  of  events  "  that  had  occurred" 
at  the  Asyium  before  Monk's  acquaintance  with 
it,  denies,  nevertheless,  that  she  is  the  author  of  the 
delectable  story  attributed  to  her. 

The  whole  account  given  in  the  eighteenth  chap- 
ter, of  the  manufacture  and  use  of  wax  tapers  at  the 
Hotel  Dieu,  is  notoriously  false.  We  oppose,  as 
witnesses  on  this  point,  the  entire  population  of  tlio 
city.  It  is  stated,  that  the  "  Pope  had  given  early 
notice  that  the  burning  of  wax  candles  would  af- 
ford  protection  from  the  disease,  (the  cholera,)  and 
that  his  message  was  promulgated  in  the  Cray 
Nunnery,  the  Congregational  Nunnery,  and  to  Ca- 
tholics at  large,  through  the  pulpits."  As  an  in- 
stance  of  the  loose  manner  in  which  these  fabri- 
cations are  constructed,  the  reader  will  remark 
that  no  mention  is  made  of  the  promulgation  of  the 
"  Pope's  message"  at  the  Hotel  Dieu,  although  it 
was  in  the  latter  institution,  it  is  alleged,  the 
"  manufacturing  business"  was  principally  carried 
on.  The  origin  of  these  lies  must  be  looked  for  in 
the  manufacturing  experience  gained  by  the  pre- 
tended ex-nun  at  the  Magdalen  Asylum,  and  in  the 
well-known  use  of  wax  tapers  in  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic worship.  .  No  ♦<  Pope's  message'*  was  pro- 


61 


!" 


as 


mulgated  in  Canada  concerning  the  cholera,  and 
the  only  document  on  the  subject  proceeding  from 
the  superior  clergy  of  the  church,  was  the  following 
pastoral  letter  of  the  Right  Rev.  the  Bishop  of 
Quebec.  The  fanatics  may  make  the  most  of  it 
for  farther  exposures  of  "  Popish  superstitions  :" 

"  You  are  aware,  our  very  dear  brethren,  that  an 
epidemical  disease,  known  under  the  name  of  the 
Cholera  morhus,  having  escaped  from  Asia,  has  ex- 
erted, for  more  than  a  year  past,  its  terrible  ra- 
vages in  different  European  states,  casting  every 
where  fright  and  consternation,  and  reaping  on 
its  passage  a  great  number  of  victims.  Until  the 
present  moment,  contemplating  it  at  a  distance,  we 
have  lived  in  security,  and  have  had  only  to  lament 
tlie  evils  it  has  caused  in  the  old  world.  But  we 
are  now  disturbed  from  our  repose  by  the  pro- 
gress of  the  disease,  which,  according*;  to  the  last 
accounts,  has  already  penetrated  into  various  parts 
of  England  and  Scotland,  and  has  even  made  trem- 
ble the  immense  population  of  the  metropolis. 

"  This  plague  seems  to  threaten  us ;  well-founded 
apprehensions  have  gained  every  mind.  Our  inti- 
mate relations  with  the  mother-country  give  us  rea- 
son to  fear  that  the  spring  arrivals  may  carry  to 
us  the  seed  of  this  contagion. 

"  It  is  true,  that  our  Provincial  legislature,  in  ii^ 
wisdom,  has  spared  nothing  to  preserve  us  from  so 
great  a  misfortune.  By  a  special  law,  passed  at  its 
last  session,  a  board  of  health  has  been  formed,  and 
instructions  calculated  to  anticipate  and  arrest  the 
effects  of  the  disease  are  about  to  be  distributed 
in  our  cities  and  throughout  the  country.  But 
what  may  serve  all  these  means  of  human  prudence, 
if  the  God  of  mercy  does  not  extend  to  us  his  pro- 

U 


6^ 


tecting  arm?  Nisi  Dominus  cuModierit  civitatem^ 
frustra  vigilat  qui  custodiit  earn,  (Ps.  126,  v.  2.) 

Moreover,  ().  V.  D.  B.,  if  we  are  compelled  to 
acknowledge  in  this  calamity  the  efibcts  of*  divine 
vengeance  on  the  culpable  nations  of  the  earth, 
have  we  not  just  reason  to  fear  that  our  multiplied 
iniquities  may  draw  down  on  our  heads  the  chas- 
tisement  of  an  insulted  and  contemned  Providence. 

**  Yes,  O.  V.  D.  B.,  we  cannot  disf.imulate  to  our- 
selves :  a  dark  cloud  hangs  over  us  ;  a  contagion,  a 
thousand  times  more  disastrous  than  epidemical  dis- 
ease, commences  to  spread  itself  over  our  ancient 
soil,  and  to  invade  our  ancient  virtues :  a  torrent 
of  disorders,  inevitable  consequences  of  the  weaken, 
ing  of  our  faith,  has  already  made  strange  ravage« 
in  our  land,  formerly  so  moral  and  so  religious.  It 
would  not  be  surprising,  if  heaven,  in  its  anger, 
should  envelope  us  in  a  calamity,  the  destructive 
consequences  of  which  have  already  been  felt  by  so 
many  nations. 

"  Under  these  circumstances,  O.  V.  D.  B.,  with  a 
heart  penetrated  by  the  liveliest  grief,  we  invite 
you  to  prepare  for  the  day  of  mourning  and  afflic- 
tion  by  a  sincere  return  to  righteousness.  Let  um 
implore  togethc  r,  and  with  tears,  the  goodness  of  our 
God,  so  much  outraged  by  the  perversity  of  the  age. 
Indulgentiam  ejvs  fusts  lacrymis  postuhmus,  (Judith, 
ch.  8.  V.  14.)  Let  us  bow  down  even  to  the  dust 
in  his  presence,  humiliemus  illi  animas  nostras^ 
(Ibid  .  .  .  v.  16.) ;  and,  following  the  example  of 
the  inhabitants  of  Nineveh,  let  each  one  be  convert- 
ed ;  let  him  abandon  his  evil  ways  and  the  iniquity 
of  his  hands.  Converiaiur  vir  a  ivd  sud  et  ah  mi- 
quitate  quae  est  in  manibus  eorum,  (Jonas,  ch.  3.  v, 
8.)    Who  knows  but  that  God,  touched  by  our  re- 


63 


pentance  and  our  wailings,  may  turn  to  us  and  par- 
don us ;  but  that  his  anger  may  be  appeased,  and 
the  warrant  against  us  withdrawn  !  Quis  scit  si 
convertaiur  et  ignoscat  Deus  ct  revertatur  a  furore  irm 
SM(B  et  non  ferihimus?  (Ibid.  v.  9). 

*»  FOR  THESE  REASONS,  and  in  the  holy 
name  of  God,  we  have  determined  and  ordered,  and 
determine  and  order,  what  follows : 

"  1.  On  Friday,  the  fourth  d;iy  of  the  month  of 
May  next,  there  shall  be  celebrated  in  all  the  parish 
churfhes  which  have  resident  curates,  a  solemn 
mass,  jiro  qiiocuvxque  necessitate;  at  the  close  of 
which  shall  be  sung,  on  bended  knees,  the  Domine^ 
non  secundum^  &:c.  with  the  verse  ostende  nobis  Do* 
mine^  &c.  and  the  orison  Deusj  qiii  non  mortem^  &c. 
us  in  the  missal,  in  the  mass,  jyro  miandd  morialitate. 
We  expect  of  the  piety  of  our  faithful  diocesans, 
that  they  will  sanctify  the  day  in  a  special  manner, 
by  prayer,  fasting,  and  repose. 

"  2.  In  all  the  churches  and  chapels  of  our  diocese, 
where  mass  is  celebrated  in  public,  each  Sunday  or 
day  of  obligation,  immediately  after  the  parish 
mass,  conventual  or  principal,  the  celebrating  priest 
shall  recite  on  his  knees,  and  in  a  loud  voice,  to  the 
responses  of  the  people,  five  Pater  and  five  Ave 
Maria ;  after  which  he  shall  recite  the  verse  ostende 
nobis f  &c.  and  the  before-mentioned  orison,  DeuSf 
qui  non  mortem,  ^c.  We  hope  that  such  as  can- 
not assist  at  the  divine  service,  will  recite  the  five 
Pater  and  Ave  Maria  in  their  families. 

"  3.  Each  priest  shall  add  to  the  mass  of  the 
day,  the  orison,  ne  despiciaSy  &;c.  as  in  the  missal, 
(inter  orationes  ad  diversa,)  whenever  the  mass  of 
the  day  shall  not  be  of  the  1st  classt  or  solenm  of 


•4 


the  2nd  class ;  and  this  same  orison  shall  replace 
that  marked  ad  libitum  in  the  other  masses. 

**  4.  At  all  elevations  shall  be  sung  the  anthem  of 
St.  Joseph,  first  patron  of  the  diocese,  Esse  Jidelis 
servusy  dec.  and  the  verse  Gloria  et  dimticB,  Ate. 
and  the  orison  sanctissimcB  genetricisj  dec. 

"  5.  The  prayers  prescribed  in  the  three  preced- 
ing articles  shall  commence  the  first  Sunday  after 
the  4th  of  May,  and  shall  be  continued  until  further 
notice. 

"  The  present  letter  shall  be  read  and  published 
in  every  parish,  and  read  in  chapter  in  all  religioufs 
communities  the  first  Sunday  after  its  reception,  or 
the  Sunday  of  Quasimodo,  Those  living  in  distant 
places,  and  who  shall  not  receive  it  in  time,  shall  pub- 
lish it  the  first  Sunday  after  its  reception,  and  shall 
consecrate  to  the  works  hereinbefore  determined 
the  following  Sunday. 

"  Given  at  Quebec,  under  our  sign,  the  seal 
of  our  arms,  and  the  countersign  of  our 
secretary,  the  ninth  of  April,  eig^^teen 
hundred  and  thirty-two. 

Bern.  Cl.  Bishop  of  Quebec." 
By  My  Lord, 
L.+S. 

C.  F.  Cazeau,  Pst,  Secretary, 

It  will  be  seen,  that  the  letter  contains  several 
quotations  from  the  **  Bible,"  and  also  that  it  is  or- 
dered  to  be  read  in  all  religious  communities.  It 
is  not  surprising  that  a  prostitute  should  be  igno- 
rant of  the  use  made  of  the  Scriptures  by  the  Ca- 
tholic clergy ;  that  she  should  confound  a  pasto- 
ral letter  of  the  bishop  with  the  "  Pope's  message," 
and  that  she  should  not  know  that  the  letter  was  read 


(■ 


IS 


fe 


4t 


05 


» 


?» 


in  Ihe  Hotel  Dieii.  It  will  rot,  however,  be  doubted, 
^  that  on  all  tlici-e  points  nuns  are  well  informed.  It  is 
I  stated,  ibr  the  .sutisiiiction  ot*  the  tanatics,  that  in 
the  niattera  of  praying  and  fasting,  "  Church  of 
England  superntition"  had  the  advance  of  "  Ro- 
man Catholic  f^uperstition."  The  proclamation  of 
the  Governor,  on  tlie  same  subject,  is  dated  the 
fourth  of  April,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-two. 

At  page  195  it  is  stated,  as  a  "  remarkable  fact," 
that  "  not  one  case  of  that  disease  (the  cholera) 
existed  in  the  nunnery  during  either  of  the  sea- 
8ons  in  wiiich  it  proved  so  fatal  in  the  city."  We 
cannot  give  credit  to  the  advisers  of  Monk  for  her 
complete  conversion  from  the  "  Errors  of  Popery" 
to  "pure  Evangelism."  She  pretty  clearly  at- 
tributes the  "  remarkable  fact"  to  the  influence  of 
the  "  wax  tapers."  After  all,  her  story  may  be  a 
Kort  of  permitted  Evangelical  lie  ;  for,  in  point  of 
fact,  in  the  ordinary  sense,  (not  Monk's,)  two  nuns 
of  the  Hotel  Dieu  died  of  the  Asiatic  Cholera.  The 
entire  number  of  deaths  among  the  sisterhood,  from 
the  year  1829  to  thenwnth  of  July,  1836,  exclusive 
of  murders  or  **  strange  disappearances,"  amount 
to  six.  Their  graves  may  be  visited  by  all  whom 
Jfl      it  concerns. 

"  When  the  election  riots  prevailed  in  Montreal," 
i  is  an  approach  to  a  date,  and  offers  one  of  the  two 
opportunities  the  reader  of  the  "  Disclosures" 
has  of  comparing  the  progress  of  external  events 
with  the  internal  history  of  the  Hotel  Dieu.  That 
Monk  was  an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  is  to  be  in- 
ferred by  reflecting  persors  from  the  interesting 
"disclosure"  that  the  riots  "gave  her  serious 
I  thoughts,"  and  that  it  was  to  her  "  own  satisfaction" 
she  ascertained  there  was  "  a  quantity  of  gun-pow- 

6* 


66 


dcr  in  a  state  of  preparation"  under  the  direction 
of  the  superior  of  the  convent ! 

Monk's  "  serious  thoughts'*  are,  in  truth,  a  remi- 
niscence of  the  Montreal  house  of  correction.  She 
was  immured  there  during  the  election  riets,  and 
as  the  house  is  guarded  by  sentinels,  she  had  an 
opportunity  of  smelling  gunpowder.  The  "  supe- 
rior" of  the  house  of  correction  at  that  time  was 
Captain  Holland. 

The  "punishment  of  the  Cap,"  mentioned  at 
page  201  and  elsewhere,  is  a  reminiscence  of  the 
early  life  of  the  pretended  ex-nun.  She  has  been 
afflicted  from  her  youth  with  a  malady  in  the  ear, 
which  compels  her  to  wear  a  cap.  It  was  the 
malady,  not  the  cap,  that  "  took  away  her  reason." 
When  the  pain  waa  excessive,  various  applications 
were  made  to  her  head  to  remove  it.  We  have  in- 
formation on  this  point  from  Mrs.  McDonell,  Mrs. 
Monk,  and  several  other  persons.  It  seems,  that  if 
Monk  had  had  an  opportunity  of  examining  her  head, 
the  "  disclosures"  might  have  been  extended  seve- 
ral chapters.  The  acquaintance  of  Monk  with  Dr. 
Neilson  was  not  formed  at  the  hospital,  but  at  her 
mother's  house.  Her  pretended  attendance  on  Dr. 
Neilson  at  the  Hotel  Dieu  Hospital  was,  as  will  be 
seen,  a  verv  hazardous  fabrication. 

"Popish  priests,"  converted  to  "  pure  evangel- 
ism,"  may  know  that  the  "  Agnus  Dei"  mention- 
ed at  page  213,  is  not  so  very  rare  an  article  as  is 
implied  in  the  "  Disclosures."  Nuns  are  more  fa- 
miliar with  the  "  Agnus  Dei"  than  women  of  the 
class  of  Maria  Monk.  The  twentieth  and  last 
chapter  of  the  "  Disclosures"  relates  the  "  despe- 
rate" escape  of  Monk  from  the  cloisters  of  the  Hotel 
Dieu  convent.     The  narrative  need  only  be  read 


\ 


«T 


>» 


to  be  rejected.  Tlie  fiction  may  be  at  once  per- 
ceived without  even  comparing  it  with  other  parts 
of  the  "  Disclosures."  If  wc  proceed  to  make  the 
comparison,  we  shall  discover  that  it  is  utterly  at 
variance  with  previous  statements.  We  cite  the 
following  additional  instance  of  the  contradictions 
in  the  "Disclosures,"  and  we  ask  the  candid  reader 
if  there  can  be  found  language  too  strong  to  express 
the  just  abhorrence  which  the  conduct  of  the  ad- 
visers of  "  Monk"  must  inspire.  It  is  stated  at 
page  222,  that  "  it  was  well  known  to  some  of  the 
nuns  that  she  had  twice  left  the  convent  from 
choice."  Now  we  defy  the  most  subtle  inquirer  to 
discover  from  the  pitvious  narrative  that  she  had 
"  twice  left  the  convent,"  either  "  from  choice"  or 
otherwise.  The  only  distinct  and  deliberate  men- 
tion of  her  having  left  the  convent  occurs  at  page 
43.  We  point  out  these  signal  and  startling  con- 
tradictions, not  more  for  the  purpose  of  convict- 
ing Monk,  than  with  a  view  it)  hold  up  the  infamous 
intentions  and  acts  of  mon,  who,  in  the  presence  of 
such  manifest  demonstration  of  tlie  falsehood  of  the 
•♦  Awful  Disclosures,"  have  nevertheless  undertaken 
to  uphold  their  truth  and  verisimilitude.  It  will 
be  remembered,  that  without  the  countenance  and 
support  of  those  men,  tho  "  Awful  Disclosures" 
would  never  have  been  })ublished — never  have  been 
circulated — and  most  certainly  would  never  have 
been  believed. 


t> 


(iB 


CHAi'TER  V. 

^■^  lam  willinp:  to  rbk  my  credit  for  truth  and  niiicfritu  on  thf  fire- 
neral  corrrspondence  btturcn  viif  discription  and  thimrg  as  they 


are: 


•*  Aviful  DisrhsureSy^  page  73. 

The  strange  audacity  of  the  advisers  and  sup- 
porters of  Monk  in  advancing  her  acquai  ntanco 
with  the  interior  of  tlic  Hotel  Dicu  Hospitfil  and 
Convent,  as  a  test  of  the  truth  of  her  narrative,  is 
a  piece  of  quackery  of  fatal  contrivance.  Tiiey 
appear  not  to  have  reflected  that  it  was  possible  to 
meet  them  on  this  their  own  chosen  ground,  and 
convict  them  of  the  most  deliberate  forgery. 

Previously  to  placing  before  the  public  the  direct 
and  conclusive  refutatory  evidence  we  arc  possess- 
ed of,  we  shall  proceed  to  examine  the  description 
of  the  interior  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  with  reference  to 
its  apparent  credibility  and  compatibility  with  what 
is  publicly  known  of  that  Hospital  and  Convent. 

Even  the  introduction  to  the  pretended  descrip- 
tion is  deficient  in  truth  and  verisimilitude.  It  is 
stated  at  page  14,  that  "  Monk  is  sensible  that  new 
walls  may  be  constructed,  or  old  ones  removed  ;" 
and  that  "  she  has  been  credibly  informed  that 
masons  have  been  employed  in  the  nunnery  since 
she  left  it."  Monk's  "  architectural  sensibility" 
must  have  been  acquired  during  her  recent  resi- 
dence in  New-York,  for  it  seems  from  the  narra- 
tive,  that  during  her  pretended  noviciate  and  nun- 
ship,  her  education  in  the  more  masculine  arts  was 
entirely  neglected.  The  truth  is,  as  evory  one  who 
has  been  in  Canada  must  well  know,  that  the  par- 
tition walls  of  stone  buildings  are  there  constructed 
of  stone,  and  of  great  thicknessi     There  is  a  possi. 


69 


bility  of  removing  them,  but  only  by  removing  the 
entire  structure.  The  Hotel  Dieu  is  a  stone  build- 
ing, and  its  partition  walls  are  of  stone.  The  credi' 
ble  information  of  Monk  is  a  sheer  fabrication. 
M&sons  have  not  been  employed  in  the  "  nunnery" 
for  the  purpose  she  mentions,  or  for  any  othei'. 
The  contrary  is  of  public  notoriety. 

The  description  of  "  the  first  story"'  commenceif 
with  a  signal  blunder.  It  is  stated,  <^  that  begin^ 
ning  at  the  extremity  of  the  western  wing  of  the  con- 
vent, towards  Notre  Dame  street,  on  the  first  story, 
there  is — **  Now,  although  the  description  is  ob- 
viously intended  for  the  "  secluded  apartments,"  it 
so  happens  that  the  "  western  wing"  includes  public 
iiospital  apartments  only.  Moreover,  the  igno- 
ranee  of  th(?  authors  of  the  Disclosures,  of  even  the 
general  appearance  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  may  bo  in- 
ferred, when  it  is  stated  that  the  three  wings  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu  extend  equally  towards  "  Notre  Dame 
street ;"  or,  in  other  words,  th<at  Notre  Dame  street 
runs  nearly  parallel  to  their  extremities. 

It  is  stated,  in  describing  the  first  room  of  the 
first  story,  that  the  "  nuns  were  sometimes  requir- 
cd  to  bring  wood  from  the  yard,  and  pile  it  up  for 
use."  This  is  another  fabrication.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  nuns  are  not  menials,  and  that 
wood  is  "  brought"  and  "  piled"  by  domestics,  in 
the  description  of  the  second  story,  it  is  stated  to 
commence  "  beginning  as  before,  at  the  western 
extremity  of  the  north  wing."  The  wings  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu  are  two  in  number,  one  west,  one  east ; 
and  besides,  there  is  one  central  structure.  There 
is  no  "  north  wing,"  and  consequently  no  "  west- 
ern extremitj^."  It  is,  besides,  impossible  to  conceive 


70 


the  second  story  of  a  **  north  wing"  as  placed  over 
the  first  story  of  a  "  western  wing." 

In  the  description  of  the  seventh  room  of  the 
Becond  story,  a  most  hideous  charge  is  made  against 
the  nuns,  which  wc  shall  notice  only  to  express  the 
profoundest  scorn  for  the  mean  and  degraded  in- 
tellects that  can  entertran  it  for  a  single  instant. 
As  in  the  case  of  a  similar  charge  brought  against 
the  priests,  we  pronounce  it  to  be  incompatible 
with  the  nature  of  things ;  incompatible  with 
secrecy. 

Our  general  remarks  on  this  feigned  description 
may  be  briefly  summed  up.  Firstly,  there  are  enu- 
merated  in  it  no  less  than  five  community  rooms, 
and  our  explanation  of  what  a  community  room 
isy  given  in  a  previous  part  of  this  refutation,  must 
satisfy  the  reader  that  the  description  is  a  f  «.brica. 
tion.  Secondly,  the  manifest  falsehood  of  the 
secret  "  bell  pull"  outside  of  the  gate,  is  another 
proof  of  the  stupid  defamation.  A  secret  **  bell 
pull"  outside  of  the  gate,  and  in  the  public  street ! 
Thirdly,  it  cannot  be  inferred  whether  it  is  the  de- 
ficription  of  the  pretended  ex-novice  or  the  pretend- 
ed ex-nun  ;  it  would  appear  to  be  from  the  former, 
for  the  following  reasons.  At  page  77,  Monk  de- 
scribes  herself  as  ignorant  of  what  was  "  beyond" 
the  ninth  apartment  on  the  first  story :  and  at  page 
81  she  describes  herself  as  doubtful  of  the  extent 
of  the  "public  hospitals."  Now,  at  page  214  it  is 
implied  that  there  were  only  "  three  rooms"  which 
she  never  entered,  and  in  the  nineteenth  and 
twentieth  chapters,  we  learn  that  she  was  an  atten. 
dant  in  the  hospitals,  and  of  course  acquainted  with 
their  extent. 

If  the  description  is    from  tlio   pretended  cx-no. 


71 


i  over 

)f  the 
gainst 
Bss  the 
ed  in. 
istant. 
gainst 
patible 
\   with 

ription 
re  enii- 
rooms, 

room 
I,  must 
«.brica- 
of  the 
mother 

"bell 
street ! 
the  de- 
retend- 
tbrmer, 
onk  de- 
eyond" 
at  page 
)  extent 
14  it  is 

which 
th  and 
1  atten- 
cd  with 

I  ex-no. 


vice,  why  is  that  of  the  ex-nun  held  hack  ?  Who 
will  undertake  to  reconcile  these  manifest  contra- 
dictions ;  or  who  will  account  for  them  otherwise 
than  by  pronouncing  the  description  an  obvious 
fabrication  ?  It  is  a  fabrication.  The  **  interior 
of  the  Black  Nunnery"  has  beeu  "examined"  by 
competent  persons,  and  has  been  found  to  be  not 
only  "  materially  different,"  but  entirely  different 
from  the  description  given  in  the  "disclosiires."  Their 
conclusive  testimony  will  be  found  among  the  do- 
cumentary evidence. 

We  arc  informed  by  Mrs.  McDonnell  that  the 
whole  is  a  reminiscence  of  the  Asylum.  The  fur- 
niture is  in  many  instances  such  as  Monk  saw  at 
the  Asylum  ;  and  the  relative  positions  of  the  rooms 
and  passages  generally  correspond. 

We  repeat,  that  the  filthy  turpitude  of  the  abet- 
tors of  Monk,  in  the  matter  of  these  "  Disclosures," 
has  never  been  .yurpassed  ;  and  that  their  fool-har- 
dinesB  in  committing  themselves  before  the  world 
in  support  of  such  a  mass  of  clumsy  and  atrocious 
defamation,  is  without  example  in  the  annals  of 
l»istory.  It  is  n©w  our  business  to  exhibit  who 
Maria  Monk  really  is,  where  she  has  lived,  and  how 
she  has  lived.  This  will  be  the  subject  of  our  next 
chapter. 


-      .  it  , 

CHAPTER  VI. 

*  t  » 

hiogruiiiKkal  artich — on  tJte  Life  of  Maria  Monk. 

M  \Hi A.  Monk  was  born  at  St.  John*s,  Lower  Cana* 
da,  about  the  ye«r  1817,  and  is  now  in  hw  mne- 


rramm 


n 


teenth  year.  Her  mother,  Mrs.  Malcolm,  house- 
keeper of  the  Rev.  Hen.  EkSsoii,  and  several  other 
persons  personally  acquainted  with  her,  agree  in 
representing  that  her  age  docs  not  exceed  nineteen. 
Previously  to  his  viarriage,  the  father  of  Maria 
Monk  had  heen  employed  in  an  hotel  at  Quel)ec. 
The  building  did  then  belong,  and  we  l)elieve  does 
still,  to  the  Honorable  Chief  Justice  Sewell.  Ho 
was  removed  from  Quebec,  and  placed,  on  the  soli- 
citation of  the  Honorable  John  Muri,  in  the  situa- 
tion  of  barrack-master  at  St.  John's ;  where  he  mar- 
ried the  motlier  of  our  heroine.  At  a  very  early 
age  Maria  attended  the  school  of  Mr.  Adam  Miller 
at  St.  John's,  and  there  became  acquainted  with 
lier  master's  son,  Mr.  William  Miller ;  an  ac- 
quaintance which  has  recently  been  renewed  in  the 
city  of  New-York  under  circumstances  of  mutual 
advantage  to  the  parties.  Her  father  died  of  apo. 
plexy,  at  Laprairie,  on  the  river  St.  Lawrence,  about 
the  year  1824  ;  and  shortly  afterwards  her  motlier 
removed  to  Montreal,  and  was  appointed  house- 
keeper  of  the  government  house  ;  which  situation 
she  still  retains.  At  the  age  of  nine  years  Maria 
was  sent  to  the  poor  school  of  the  Congregation,  and 
remained  there  about  nine  months.     It  is  stated  bv 

• 

her  mother  that  Maria  was  at  the  Congregational 
school  in  the  year  1825.  The  scholars  at  the  poor 
school  of  the  Congregation  are  divided  into  two 
classes.  Parents  able  and  willing,  are  charged  the 
sum  of  two  dollars  and  a  half  per  annum  for  the  in- 
struction  given  at  the  poor  school ;  and  Mrs.  Monk 
was  one  of  those  parents.  Maria's  conduct  at 
school  was  not  acceptable  to  her  instructors,  and  her 
dismission  from  the  school  was  occasioned  by  som^^ 
juvenile  freaks,  giving  ample  promise  of  the  conduct 


73 


with 


' 


of  matured  age.  The  mother  attributes  the  eccen- 
tricities of  the  daughter  to  an  accident  which  befel 
her  at  St.  John's.  It  appears  that  Maria,  while  at 
school,  had  her  ear.  perforated  by  a  slate  pencil, 
and  that  a  piece  of  the  pencil  has  remained  in  her 
ear  to  this  day.  Her  sufferings  arising  from  this 
cause  have  been  acute,  and  have  led  to  the  suppo- 
sition that  her  intellect  has  been  from  the  time  of 
the  accident  seriously  and  badly  affected.  It  is 
known  to  medical  jurisconsults,  that  no  question 
is  of  more  difficult  determination  than  that  of  al- 
leged insanity.  It  is  the  opinion  of  Mrs.  Monk,  and 
others  personally  acquainted  with  Maria,  that  she 
is  not  insane  ;  but  still  they  deplore  that  her  manner 
and  conduct,  from  the  time  of  the  accident,  have 
been  marked  by  strange  flightiness  and  unaccount- 
able  irregularities.  Be  this  as  it  may,  her  mother 
has  always  found  her  a  wayward  child,  and  of  dif- 
ficult management.  After  her  dismission  from  the 
Congreg^ation,  she  attended  various  schools,  with 
indifferent  success.  Her  mother's  authority  was 
insufficient  to  restrain  her  adventurous  disposition  ; 
the  physicians  consulted  on  her  malady,  were  una- 
ble to  effect  a  cure ;  and  she  acquired  among  her 
acquaintances,  a  character  for  uncertainty  of  con- 
duct and  principle,  which  the  subsequent  events  of 
her  life  have  not  helped  to  remove. 

Dr.  Nelson  of  the  city  of  Montreal  has  known 
her  from  her  youth,  and  often,  on  her  mother's  ap- 
plication, gave  her  medical  advice.  Dr.  Nelson, 
and  other  medical  practitioners  consulted  by  her 
parent,  agreed  that  an  operation  on  the  ear  would 
be  extremely  hazardous.  Thus  it  has  happened 
that  the  cause  of  her  malady  still  subsists,  and  that 
she  still  endures  its  effects. 


n 


In  1829  she  escaped  from  her  mother*s  protec- 
tion, and  made  a  voyage  to  Quebec  on  board  the 
Hercules  steamer,  then  commanded  by  Capt.  Arm- 
strong. Capt.  Armstrong  states  that  he  looked  upcn 
Maria  Monk  as  insane.  She,  in  fact,  attempted  to 
throw  herself  out  of  the  cabin  window,  and  was 
only  prevented  from  effecting  her  purpose  by  being 
locked  up  in  a  state  room. 

On  her   return  to  Montreal,  her  mother  was  in- 
duccd  to   endeavor  to  get  her  received  into  a  con- 
vent.     Mrs.  Monk  applied  for  counsel  and  aid  to 
several  gentlemen,  among  whom  may  be  named  the 
Rev.  H.  Esson  and  Dr.  Nelson.    Her  design  could 
not    be  effected  for  a  variety   of  reasons,      Mrs. 
Monk  was  and  is  poor.     Her  sole  dependence  is  on 
her  situation  at  the  government  houdC.  and  the  two 
shillings  a  day  she  there  receives.      The  payments 
of  Mrs.  Monk*s  salary  are  made  quarterly,  througli 
the  commandant  of  the  city  of  Montreal,  and  aro 
so  regulated  that  it  is  impossible  they  should  be  re- 
ceived by  any  other  person  than  Mrs.  Monk  herself. 
Mrs.  Monk's  poverty  was  an  obstacle  not  easily  to 
be  overcome.     The  laws   of  Canada   require  that 
persons   taking   the  religious   habit   shall   pay,  as 
dowries,  certain  sums  of  money,  and  such  payments 
are  most  generally  made  by  the  parents  of  the  ap- 
plicant :  but  in  some  instances  subscriptions  are 
entered  into,  and  the  religious  vocation  of  a  deserv- 
ing  object  is  secured  by   the  contributions  of  the 
good  and  charitable.     In  the  case  of  Maria  Monk, 
there  existed  no  inducement  to  confer  on  her  dis- 
interested   benefactions.     At   the  age  of  fourteen 
her  character  was  notoriously  bad,  and  petty  lar- 
ceny  was  with  her  no  unfrequent  crime.      Mrs. 
Malcolm  states,  that  Maria  once  applied  to  her  for 


an( 
th( 

an( 

shd 
L( 

N( 


75 


rotec- 
rd  the 
Arm- 
l  upcn 
ted  to 
1  was 
being 

as  in- 
1  cc^- 
aid  to 
ed  the 
could 
Mrs. 
e  is  on 
lie  two 
^incnts 
iroiigh 
tttd  are 
I  be  re- 
lerselt'. 
isily  to 
that 


re 


as 


payi 

yinents 
the  ap. 
)ns  are 
descrv- 

of  tho 
,  Monk, 
her  dis- 
burteen 
5tty  lar- 
Mrs. 

her  for 


some  money,  on  pretence  that  she  was  desired  to 
do  so  by  her  mother.  Mrs.  Malcolm  gave  the 
money,  but  subsequently  ascertained  that  Maria 
had  practised  on  her  a  gross  deception.  As  the 
convents  of  Montreal  are  not  asylums  for  corrected 
>ice  or  reformed  profligacy,  Maria's  previous  ha- 
bits rendered  her  admittance,  even  as  a  postulantey 
utterly  impossible.  Besides,  Maria  was  not  a  Ro- 
man Catholic  ;  and  her  readiness  to  become  one,  to 
effect  a  special  purpose,  would  not  have  been  con- 
sidered a  suflicient  guarantee  against  a  possible  re- 
lapse. 

Discouraged  in  her  endeavours,  Mrs.  Monk 
again  resorted  to  her  personal  authority,  but  with 
little  success.  Her  daughter  became  a  confirmed 
vagrant. 

In  the  years  1831,  1832,  we  find  her  at 
Sorel  or  William  Henry,  a  town  situate  on^he  river 
Richelieu,  about  forty-five  miles  below  Montreal. 
She  there  first  resided  with  Charles  Gouin,  hotel 
keeper,  and  subsequently  at  Mrs.  Monk's  of  the 
same  place.  From  Mrs.  Monk's  she  ran  away,  af- 
ter having  robbed  the  house  of  a  quantity  of  wear- 
ing apparel,  and  proceeded  to  St.  Ours,  where  she 
managed  to  procure  employment  at  Mr.  Pringle's>  a 
farmer  of  that  vicinity.  Discovered  and  dismiss- 
ed by  Mr.  Pringle,  she  proceeded  to  St.  Denis, 
and  in  various  occupations  employed  her  time  until 
the  spring  of  1834. 

About  the  12th  of  July  in  the  same  year,  1834, 
and  shortly  after  her  withdrawal  from  St.  Denis, 
she  was  engaged  as  a  domestic  in  the  tamily  of  C. 
Lovis,  watchmaker  and  jeweller,  residing  in 
Notre  Dame  street,  opposite  the  Montreal  seminary. 
Her  conduct,  in  this  situation,  was  not  satisfactory 


76 


to  her  master ;  and  her  bad  character,  which  waft 
quickly  ascertained,  occasioned  her  dismissal  about 
the  9th  of  August  following.  During  her  resi- 
dence at  the  house  of  Mr.  Lovis,  Maria  contriv- 
ed to  give  evidence  of  a  disturbed  and  ill.regulat- 
ed  intellect.  She  exhibited  strange  eccentricities, 
and  laid  claims  to  an  interest  and  sympathy  for  her 
person  which  neither  her  conduct  nor  character 
entitled  her  to  expect.  She  signified  to  Mr.  Lovis 
her  desire  to  embrace  the  Roman  Catholic  faith, 
and  requested  permission  to  prepare  in  his  house 
for  the  rc-baptism  which  she  imagined  the  canons 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  church  would  require.  Mr. 
Lovis  treated  her  application  as  a  pretence,  and 
regarding  her  as  an  unworthy  person,  dismissed  her 
from  his  service. 

After  her  departure  from  the  house  of  Mr.  Lovis, 
it  seems  fehe  took  up  her  habitation  in  various  bro- 
thels at  Griffin  Town,  a  sul)urb  of  Montreal,  and 
elsewhere.  At  a  subsequent  period,  in  perambulating 
with  Louis  Malo,  a  constable  of  the  Montreal  courts, 
«he  pointed  out  various  resorts  of  vice  in  which 
she  had  resided. 

In  the  month  of  October,  1H34,  we  find  her  at 
Varennes,  a  town  fifteen  miles  from  Montreal,  on 
the  opposite  side  of  the  river.  Hhe  there  committed 
a  theft  in  the  house  of  Girard,  hotel-keeper,  and 
returned  to  Montreal  with  various  articles  in  her 
possession,  among  which  were  a  lady's  veil  and  a 
silver  watch.  The  veil  she  disposed  of  in  Griffin 
Town,  and  the  watch  she  sold  to  Mr.  George  Sa- 
vage, watchmaker,  residing  in  St.  Paul  street  in 
the  city  of  Montreal.  Girard,  so  soon  as  be  dis- 
covered  his  loss,  left  Varennes  in  pursuit  of  the 
thief,    and  lodged   information  against  her  in  the 


n 


Montreal  police  office.  On  his  affidavit  a  war- 
rant was  immediately  issued  against  the  fugitive, 
and  put  for  execution  into  the  hands  of  the  consta- 
hie,  Louis  Malo.  Malo,  having  information  that 
Maria  was  concealed  at  Lachine,  instantly  proceed- 
ed there,  and  succeeded  in  securing  her  person. 
On  her  apprehension  she  confessed  her  guilt,  and 
was  carried  in  custody  to  the  city, ,  The  veil  could 
not  he  recovered,  but  the  watch  was  immediately 
restored  by  Mr.  Savage.  Still  in  custody,  she  was 
then  taken  to  Varennes  to  be  identified  ;  and,  in  con- 
sideration of  her  youth,  and  moved  by  her  tears 
and  entreaties,  the  injured  parties  consented  to  her 
release.  It  would  seem  that  Maria  is  not  deficient 
in  personal  charms,  for  she  made  an  impression  on 
the  heart  of  the  susceptible  constable,  who,  taking 
her  under  his  protection,  returned  with  her  to  Mon- 
treal. Arrived  in  the  city,  she  was  placed,  by  the 
care  of  Constable  Malo,  in  a  tavern,  which  then 
existed  at  the  corner  of  St.  Joseph  and  Commission 
streets,  and  which  was  occupied  by  a  person  of  the 
name  of  Richard  Ouston.  About  this  time  her 
cohabitation  with  her  protector,  the  constable,  oc- 
curred. 

On  the  9th  of  November,  in  the  same  year, 
1834,  the  spirit  of  adventure,  which  no  circumstances 
had  been  able  to  control,  again  broke  forth.  On 
that  day  Maria's  wanderings  led  her  to  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  Lachine  canal,  into  which  she  ma- 
nifested a  strong  disposition  to  throw  herself.  Her 
movements  having  by  chance  been  observed  by 
some  persons  noar  her,  they  interfered  with  her  self- 
Haci  fice,  and  conveyed  her  to  a  house  in  the  vi- 
cinity. Al\er  some  hours  spent  in  hysterics,  moans, 
und  lamentations,  Maria's  intellect   and  memory 

lault 


9P 


i? 


cleared  up,  and  she;  declared  herself  to  be  the 
daughter  ul'  Doctor  W.  Robertson,  one  of  the  city 
magistrates ;  but,  on  being  confronted  with  that  func- 
tionary, she  gave  her  real  name  and  parentage. 
8he  represented,  however,  that  she  had  no  home, 
and  gave  a  confused  and  disjointed  account  of  her- 
self. Under  these  circumstances,  she  was  commit- 
ted  to  the  house  of  correction  as  a  vagrant,  and 
remained  there  until  the  19th  of  November. 
Her  mother  having  learned  her  situation,  procured 
her  liberation,  and  took  her  to  the  government  house, 
of  which  she  was  the  keeper. 

Whilst  in  jail,  slie  was  seen  and  spoken  to  by 
Mrs.  Beaudry,  a  lady  whose  charitable  intentions 
frequently  conducted  her  to  scenes  of  misery  and  dis- 
tress. Affected  by  the  forlorn  condition  in  which 
she  vsaw  Maria,  she  represented  her  case  to  Mrs. 
McDonell,  and  prevailed  on  that  lady  to  receive 
her  as  an  inmate  of  the  Magdalen  Asylum.  She 
was  accordingly  conducted  there,  and  entcrc?d  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  month  of  November. 

In  the  Magdalen  Asylum  she  was  still  Maria 
Monk,  wavering  and  fanciful.  All  efforts  to  re- 
store  her  to  a  rrgulat<3(l  mode  of  thought  and  action 
proved  unavailing.  It  was  even  discovered  that 
the  seclusion  of  tlie  Asylum  did  not  prevent  her  from 
renewing  her  intercourse  with  the  constable.  She 
received  his  visits,  and  held  converse  with  him 
through  the  yard  enclosure.  At  the  Asylum,  Maria 
was  visited  by  her  mother,  who  did  not  fail  to  dis- 
cover  that  she  was  in  a  slate  of  pregnancy.  The 
same  was  alvo  renunkcd  by  Mrs.  McDonell,  and 
other  persons  about  \vn\  Her  conduct,  finally,  be- 
came so  insupportable,  that  Mrs.  McDonell  was 
compelled  to  dismiss  her,  and  she  returned  to  her 


79 


mother's  charge  at  the  beginning  of  the  month  of 
March,  1835. 

Maria  speedily  tired  of  her  home,  and  left  it 
early  in  summer.  It  was  not  known  where  she  had 
gone.  It  was  supposed  that  she  had  returned  to 
her  ancient  haunts  within  the  limits  of  the  province, 
but  it  soon  appeared,  that  with  increased  experi- 
ence she  was  induced  to  extend  the  field  of  her 
operations.  She  had  gone  to  New-York,  and  on 
the  nineteenth  of  August,  in  the  summer  of  1835, 
she  arrived  at  the  Exchange  Coffee  House,  Montreal, 
in  company  with  a  person  named  Hoyte,  who  pass- 
ed for  a  preacher,  and  of  a  person  named  Turner, 
who  passed  for  a  judge.  Tlie  judge,  the  preacher, 
and  the  prostitute  having  clubbed  their  wisdom 
and  inventive  powers,  passed  some  timo  in  laying 
the  foundation  of  charges  which  were  afterwards 
to  be  preferred  against  the  priests  and  nuns  of 
Lower  Canada.  The  parties,  however,  could  not 
long  agree.  The  judge,  a  man  waxed  in  years,  and 
probably  not  possessed  of  more  wickedness  of  heart 
than  might  be  expected  from  a  determined  Calvin- 
isi,  bociimc  disgusted  with  his  companions,  and  re- 
turned to  the  green  hills  of  Vermont,  with  the  con- 
solation of  having  wandered  from  them  on  a  wit- 
less and  wortliless  errand.  The  prostitute  also  be- 
came rcative.  She  left  tlie  preacher,  and  the  child 
she  called  his,  at  the  hotel,  and  made  her  way  to  a 
notorious  house  of  ill-fame  in  one  of  the  city 
suburbs.  She  was  there  visited  by  Constable  Malo, 
to  whom  she  expressed  herself  in  bitter  terms  of 
the  preacher,  and  declared  her  determination  never 
to  have  any  thing  more  to  say  to  him.  She  yield- 
ed, however,  to  the  persuasion  of  the  preacher,  and 
was   induced  to  leave  the  brothel   in  his  compa- 


^ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


11.25 


I.       I. 

U    il.6 


m 


V] 


^ 


^;j 


<3^  *.  ■'• 


^  o^ 


^^ 


7 


^ 


Photographic 

Sdences 

Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14S80 

(716)  872-4503 


N^ 


80 


nv.  Some  two  or  three  scenes  occurred  between 
Maria,  her  mother,  and  Hoyte,  in  which  the  con- 
duct of  the  latter  was  not  entirely  agreeable  to  our 
notions  of  clerical,  or  even  semi-clerical,  pudi- 
city. 

Maria,  again  in  the  power  of  Hoyte,  was  quickly 
removed  by  him  to  New  -York,  beyond  the  reach  of 
farther  interference.  In  that  city,  and  toward  the 
close  of  the  jear  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-five, 
were  published  the  "  Awful  Disclosures,"  which 
have  given  so  much  celebrity  to  the  name  of  Monk, 
and  even  to  that  of  Jane  Ray,  one  of  her  compa- 
nions at  the  Magdalen  Asylum.  In  New-York 
she  still  lives,  regarded  and  honored  as  a  martyr  to 
the  cause  of  pure  evangelism. 

The  author  of  this  article  understands  that  the 
preacher  Hoyte,  having  been  crowded  out  by 
more  ambitious  aspirants,  the  company  of  anti- 
papists  at  present  consists  of  W.  C.  Brownlec, 
Maria  Monk,  John  S.  Slocum,  William  Miller,  re- 
cently of  Montreal,  Andrew  Bruce,  a  "  lady,"  also 
recently  of  Montreal,  D.  Fanshaw,  and  others. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


H'i 


Documentary  evidence,  provin/:f  thnl  from  her  early  youth  yfaria 
Monk  has  led  the  life  of  a  vap;rai\t,  and  that  on  the  first  ofJantiary^ 


Monk  uxttt  on.  inmate  of  the  Hotel  J)ieu,  she  was  i7i  reality  resid- 
ing  at  various  other  })laccs  in  and  about  Montreal. 

It  would  be  possible  to  produce  here    evidence 
bearing  on  the  life  and  adventures  of  Maria  Monk, 


' 


81 


from  her  infancy  to.  the  present  moment.  She  is  still 
young — very  young ;  her  personal  acquaintances 
are  to  be  met  with  in  numerous  directions  on  the 
banks  of  the  St.  Lawrence  and  Richelieu  rivers, 
and  very  little  trouble  would  have  enabled  us  to  ex- 
hibit her  entire  career  from  the  "  Primer"  to  the 
"  Disclosures  ;"  but  it  would  not  be  interesting  to 
the  public  to  know  more  of  the  history  of  Maria 
Monk  than  is  necessary,  in  all  reason,  for  the  re- 
futation of  her  pretensions,  and  the  exposure  of 
the  imposition  which  has  been  attempted  in  her 
name  on  popular  credulity.  The  task  of  unfolding 
the  immorality  of  this  wretched  woman  is  any 
thing  but  pleasing,  it  is  not  undertaken  to  gratify 
idle  curiosity,  but  to  vindicate  from  atrocious  asper- 
sions the  characters  of  men  whom  we  deCi^^'y  \  cntj- 
rate — to  redeem  iVom  calumny  the  noble  lives  of 
good,  peaceful,  and  charitable  women. 

When  this  refutation  and  these  proofs  shall 
meet  the  eye  of  the  scurrilous  and  unhesitating 
defamer,  will  he  not  seek  to  escape  the  light  of  day 
and  the  regards  of  his  fellow-men?  The  turbid 
current  of  his  deliberate  and  blasphemous  fanati- 
cism will  be  heated  by  hot  shame  and  unavailing 
regret.  The  stupid  and  lying  wretch,  the  base 
knave,  the  imbecile  criminal,  will  writhe  in  his  an- 
guish, scorned  and  loathed  by  an  insulted  and  indig- 
nant community.  We  have  carried  back  our  in- 
quiries into  the  adventures  of  Monk  as  far  as  the 
year  1831 ;  she  was  then  in  her  fifteenth  year. 
It  cannot  be  said  positively  that  it  is  not  pretended 
that  she  was  a  professed  nun  years  previously  to  that 
age ;  but  we  have  reason  to  believe,  from  the  lan- 
guage held  by  her  supporters  in  the  public  prints, 
ths^t  her  conventual  trials  principally  occurred  in 


npp 


82 


the  years  1831, 1832.,  1833,  and  1834.   We  now  pro. 
ceed  to  exhibit  our  first  document. 


No.  1.     Evideace  of  Charles  Gouin, 

The  undersigned  having  !->een  requested  to  state  what  he 
knows  concerning  Maria  Monk,  daughter  of  Mrs.  Monk,  house- 
Iteeper  of  the  house  known  as  the  Government  House  in  Mon- 
treal, declares, — That  the  said  Maria  Monk  entered  into  his  ser- 
vice at  Sorel,or  William  Henry,  as  a  menial,  about  the  month  of 
November,  one  thousand  eight  liundred  and  thirty-one  ;  and  that 
f-he  remained  in  it  until  the  month  of  September  nearly  of  the 
following  year.  The  undersigned  declares  tliat  the  said  Maria 
remained  in  his  service  during  all  the  time  of  the  Cholera  of  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  tliirty-two ;  the  undersigned  has  un- 
derstood that  when  the  said  Maria  left  his  service,  she  made  a 
voyage  to  Quebec — that  on  her  return  therefrom,  she  took  ser- 
vice at  Mrs.  Monk's  of  Sorel,  or  William  Henri/ \  that  she  there 
commilied  a  thefi  ;  and  that  the  stolen  articles  were  found  in  her 
possession.  The  undersigned  declares  that  the  said  Maria  Monk 
told  him  that  the  said  Mrs.  Monk  of  Montreal  was  not  her  mother 
proper,  but  her  step-mother ;  which  allegation  the  undersigned 
subsequently  found  to  be  false.  The  undersigned  declares  that 
the  said  j>Iaria,  at  the  time  he  knew  her,  appeared  to  be  about 
fourteen  or  fifteen  years  old.  The  undersigned  declares  that  he 
has  never  undersrood,  except  from  public  reports  recently  spread, 
that  the  said  3Iaria  hath  made  any  residence  whatever  in  any 
Convent.  (Signed)  CHAS.  GOUIN. 

Mr.  Gouin  is  a  man  of  years,  and  keeper  of  the 
principal  hotel  of  Sorel.     His  evidence  proves — 

1.  That  in  the  year  1831  and  1832,  Monk  was 
in  his  service  for  the  s'>»  i^  of  about  ten  months. 

2.  That  she  was  in  his  service,  during  the  cholera 
season  of  1832. 

3.  That  while  in  his  service,  she  denied  her  own 
mother.  The  conduct  of  Monk,  towards  her  mother 
has  always  been  ungrateful ;  and  her  habit  of  in- 
dulging in  calumnious  remarks  on  her  parent  could 
be  testified  to  by  hundreds  of  witnesses* 


63 


No.  2.     Evidence  of  Mrs.  Monk  of  Sorel, 

Sorel,  Wh  July,  1836. 

The  undersigned,  being  requested  to  state  lier  informntion  and 
knowledge  concerning  Maria  Moni<,  daughter  to  Mrs.  Monk, 
»ouse-kenpcr  of  the  Ciovernment  House  in  the  city  of  Montreal, 
jiereby  declares  tliat  Maria  Monk  entered  her  service  as  domestic 
in  t  le  Autumn  of  1832 ;  that  the  undersigned  understood  that  Ma- 
ria nad  just  returned  from  Quebec ;  and  that  a  sliort  time  previous- 
ly she  had  been  employed  as  a  domestic  in  the  hotel  kept  by  C. 
Gouin  at  Sorel ;  that  having  remained  about  one  week  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  undersigned,  Maria  Monk  secretly  withdrew  from  it, 
carrying  with  her  a  quantity  of  wearing  ajjparcl  belonging  to  the 
undersigned ;  that  Maria  was  innuediately  pursued  to  8t.  Ours, 
a  village  about  twelve  miles  from  the  borough  of  Sorel,  and  there 
discovered  with  the  stolen  articles  ir  her  possession  ;  but  that  in 
consequence  of  her  extreme  youth  she  was  released  from  custo- 
dy, and  suffered  to  go  at  liberty.  The  undersigned  has  never  un- 
derstood, except  from  recent  public  report,  that  Maria  had  been  at 
any  time  an  inmate  of  a  convent. 

(Signed)  MARY  ANGELICA  MONK. 

To  guard  against  error  from  the  similarity  of 
names,  it  is  proper  to  state  that  ]Mrs.  Monk  is  no 
wise  connected  with  Monk  the  thief.  Mrs.  Monk's 
evidence  proves  the  commission  of  the  crime  of 
theft,  and  corroborates  the  evidence  of  Mr.  Gouin. 
On  the  liberation  of  Monk  from  custody,  she  at- 
tempted to  pass  herself  on  Mr.  Pringle,  a  farmer  of 
St.  Ours,  as  an  honest  girl ;  and  indeed  was  in  his 
service  for  a  few  days  ;  but  Mr.  Pringle  quickly 
ascertained  her  character,  and  dismissed  her  with 
ignominy. 

The  inhabitants  of  the  Canadian  villages  are 
simple  and  primitive  in  their  manners,  slow  to  sus- 
pect the  existence  of  vice,  slow  to  detect  it.  Monk 
is  represented  by  all  who  knew  her,  as  having  been 
at  one  time  a  girl  of  extremely  interesting  appear- 
a!ice.  Immediately  after  her  dismissal  from  the 
house  of  Mr.  Pringle,  she  fled  from  St.  Ours,  and 
made  her  way  to  St.  Denis,  a  village  about  twelve 


^ppip 


@4 


miles  distant.  The  communications  between  the 
French,  and  scattered  English  inhabitants  of  the 
parishes,  are  as  slight  as  it  is  possible  to  imagine. 
Monk  met,  therefore,  with  no  difficulty  in  procuring 
employment,  in  a  Canadian  family  ;  and  she  accord- 
ingly took  service  in  the  house  of  Mr.  St.  Germain, 
a  respectable  tradesman  and  mechanic  of  St.  Denis. 
Mr.  St.  Germain,  is  since  deceased  ;  but  his  widow 
has  furnished  us  with  the  following  notarial  depo- 
sition. 

No.  3.     Evidence  of  Mrs,  St  Germain* 

Sorel  22d  .My.  1836. 

In  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-six,  and  on 
the  twenty-third  day  of  July,  before  the  Notary  undersigned,  re- 
siding in  the  borough  of  St.  Denis,  appeared  Angehca  Hodgins, 
widow  of  the  hite  Anthony  Gazaille  dit  St.  Germain,  in  Jus  Ufe- 
time  hatter,  of  the  said  borough  of  St.  Denis,  who  said  and  declar- 
ed that  she  knew  well  the  so-called  3Iaria  Monk,  and  that  the 
said  Maria  was  employed  in  the  service  of  deponent  from  about 
th*»  first  day  of  October,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty- 
tv  o  to  the  month  of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thir 
ty -three ;  and  further  deponent  declared  not. 

(Signed)  ANG.  HODGINS. 

(Signed)  E.  MINAULT,  N.  P. 

This  deposition  carries  us  forward  six  months, 
to  the  spring  of  1833.  On  leaving  Mrs.  St.  Ger- 
main's, Monk  became  depf  dent  on  the  charity  of 
various  individuals,  and  remamed,  for  about  two 
months,  without  any  fixed  employment.  She  was 
regarded  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  village  as  a  girl 
of  at  least  doubtful  virtue.  This  circumstance 
compelled  her  to  quit  it.  She  wandered  into  the 
country,  and  prevailed  on  the  untutored  pe9Ji>ant9 
to  employ  her  as  a  teacher  of  English. 


85 


No,  4.     Evidence  of  Michael  Guertin* 

In  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-six,  and  the 
twenty-third  day  of  July,  before  the  Notary  of  the  Province  of 
Jjower  Canada,  undersigned — appeared, 

Michael  (jluertin,  furmer,  of  tiie  parish  of  St.  Denis,  who  said 
and  dechvred.  that  he  knew  well  the  so-called  Maria  Monk ;  that 
she  kept  a  school  in  his  house  from  about  the  fifteenth  of  the 
month  of  May,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thir- 
ty-three, to  the  end  of  the  month  of  June  of  the  same  year.  And 
further  deponent  declared,  that  he  did  not  know  how  to  sign — 
wherefore  he  made  his  mark  . . 

Signed)  MICHAEL  +  GUERTIN 

mark. 
E.  MINAULT,  N.  P. 

The  deponent  Guertin  granted  her  the  use  of  a 
room,  and  the  neighbours  were  invited  to  send  their 
children  to  the  English  mistress.  At  Guertin's 
and  other  places  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood 
she  pursued  her  adopted  profession  during  the  spring, 
summer  and  autumn  of  1833,  and  on  the  2d  of  De- 
cember in  the  same  year  entered  the  employment 
of  Miss  Louise  Bousquet,  government  school  mis- 
tress,  as  her  English  assistant. 

No.  5,     Evidence  of  Louise  BotisqtteU 

In  the  year  one  thousar  i  eight  hundred  and  thirty-six,  and  ou 
the  twenty-fourth  day  c.  July,  before  the  undersigned  Nota- 
ry Public,  residing  in  the  borough  of  St.  Denis,  appeared  Louisa 
Bousquet,  wife  ofJean  Buptiste  Archambeau,  and  declared, — 

That  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-threei 
deponent  was  mistress  of  the  Government  School  at  St.  Denis, 
District  of  Montreal ;  that  in  the  same  year  she  knew  in  the  vil- 
lage of  St.  Denis  a  \  oung  girl  named  Maria  Monk ;  that  on  the 
second  of  December,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-three, 
the  same  and  said  Maria  Monk  came  and  resided  with  the  said 
deponent  as  her  assistant  in  the  instruction  in  English  of  the  chil- 
dren committed  to  her  care ;  that  the  said  Maria  remained  la  the 
employment  of  deponent  about  seven  months  or  thereabouts,  and 
that  she  left  it  about  the  month  of  July,  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  thirty-four;  that  during:  her  stay  with  deponent,  her 
conduct  was  not  satisfactory  ;  that  deponent  was  intbrmed  that 

8 


-^JP.»I 


86 


the  said  Maria,  on  leavinp;  the  liouse  of  deponent,  withdrew  from 
8t.  Denis;  that  deponent  hiul  been  informed  and  beUeved  that 
the  entire  stay  of  the  said  Maria  at  St.  IJenis  embraced  a  period 
of  eighteen  monflis ;  that  deponent  having  been  informed,  that  in 
a  booii  publislied  at  jNew-York,  reiital  is  made  of  certain  rela- 
tions alleged  to  have  existed  heretofore  between  deponent  and 
the  said  Maria,  deponent  declared  such  recital  to  be  absolutely 
false,  with  the  single  exception  hereinbefore  mendoned ;  that  de- 

Sonent  having  been  informed  that  it  is  therein  said  that  the  said 
laria,  during  her  residence  with  deponent,  wore  on  her  person 
a  bag  containing  hair  of  the  superior  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  Convent 
of  Montreal,  deponent  declared  that  she  had  no  knowledge  of  it; 
that  having  been  informed  that  it  is  said  in  the  same  book  that 
the  said  Maria  was  married  during  her  residence  with  deponent, 
and  that  she  consulted  dop(»nent  on  the  subject  of  her  marriage, 
deponent  said  and  declared  that  slie  wt!s  a  total  stranger  to  such 
alleged  marriage  ;  and  moreover  positively  denied  the  part  impu- 
ted to  her  therein,  or  any  other  part  whatever ;  that  having  been 
informed  that  it  is  said  in  the  same  book  that  deponent  had  con- 
sented to  make  certain  representations  concerning  the  said  Ma- 
ria to  the  Superior  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  deponent  positively  deni- 
ed having  given  such  constant,  denied  having  been  spoken  to  on 
the  subject,  or  having  any  knowledge  or  information  of  the  trans- 
action mentioned  in  the  said  book,  being,  in  all  respects  and  un- 
reservedly, a  total  stranger  to  it;  that  having  been  informed  that 
it  is  said  in  the  same  ])ook  that  deponent  we .  t  to  the  said  Hotel 
Dieu  to  inquire  for  a  certain  "St.  Francis,"  deponent  positive- 
ly denied  it ;  and  moreover  declared  that  she  never  hud  an  ac- 
quaintance hving  in  the  Uotei  Dieu  of  the  said  name  of  St.  Fran- 
cis ;  and  deponent  further  declared,  that  in  the  summer  of  eigh- 
teen hundred  and  thirty-four,  Mr.  Lord  the  bishop  made  an  epis- 
copal visit  to  St.  Denis;  that  on  the  day  the  confirMations  were 
made  in  the  parisli  church,  the  said  Maria  pretended  to  deponent 
that  she  had  been  confirmed  on  the  same  occasion,  but  with  what 
truth  deponent  cannot  say ;  and  further  deponent  declared,  that 
during  the  stay  of  the  said  Maria  at  St.  Denis,  Mr.  Bedard  was 
Curate  of  the  parish,  and  i\Ir.  Birs  his  Vicar.     And  dei)onent  fur- 
ther declared,  that  she  had  never  understood,  except  from  recent 
public  report,  that  the  said  Maria  had  been  at  any  time  a  Novice, 
or  Sister,  or  inmate  in  any  Convent  whatever. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  in  the  month  of  August, 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-five,  deponent  received 
from  Montreal  two  letters,  o.ic  in  the  English  language  and  the 
other  in  the  French  language  ;  that  the  French  letter  was  signed 
"  Ambroiso  Vigeaiu,"  and  that  it  invited  deponent  to  proceed  to 
Montreal  to  reaeiNc  two  hundred  pounds  currency  which  a  lady 
there  at  Montreal  was  commissioned  to  give  her ;  that  the  Eng- 
lish letter  was  signed  "  Hoyte,"  but  that  deponent,  from  her  ig- 
noronce  of  the  language,  remained  ignorant  of  its  contents. 


87 


ew  from 
^ed  that 
a  period 
i,  that  in 
ain  rela- 
lent  and 
)sohitely 
that  de- 
the  said 

•  person 
Convent 
ige  of  it ; 
ook  that 
sponent, 
lurriage, 

•  to  such 
irt  impii- 
ingbeen 
lad  con- 
idid  Ma- 
ly  deni- 
en  to  on 
lie  trans- 
and  un- 
tied that 
id  Hotel 
positivo- 

I  an  ac- 
>t.  Fran- 
of  eigh- 
an  epis- 
ns  were 
eponent 
ith  what 
red,  that 
ard  \.as 
lent  fur- 
n  recent 

Novice, 

August, 
received 

and  the 
is  signed 
oceed  to 
h  a  lady 

he  Eng- 

II  her  ig- 

.3. 


And  deponent  further  declared,  that  deponent  did  accoraiiigly 
proceed  to  Montreal,  and  having  communicated  with  the  said 
"  Ambroise  Vigeaut,"  the  said  Anibroi^e  Vigeuiit  informed  de- 
ponent that  the  said  ^Lnna,  in  company  with  a  man  dressed  in 
black,  had  requested  of  him  very  earnestly  to  write  to  the  depo- 
nent, with  which  request  he  was  induced  to  comply;  that  depo- 
nent did  then  proceed  to  call  upon  the  mother  of  the  said  3Iaria 
at  the  Government  House,  and  that  the  said  mother  said  to  depo- 
nent that  her  daughter,  the  said  Maria,  was  a  victim  and  an  un- 
fortunate ;  that  deponent  handed  the  said  letters  to  the  said  mo- 
ther, who,  in  an  angry  manner,  burned  thorn  on  the  spot ;  and  that 
deponent  paid  no  .urtlicr  altemion  to  the  said  hivitation,orto  the 
matter  it  relates  to ;  and  further  deponent  declared  not 
(Signed,  after  perusal)        LOUIISE  BOUSQUET, 

Femme  Archambeau. 
(Signed)  E.  3HNAULT,  N.  F. 

The  part  attributed  to  Miss  Bousquet,  in  the 
**  Awful  Disclosures,"  is  more  than  she  will  confess 
to.  She  is  now  married,  and  the  curious  traveller 
visiting  the  so  called  Sixth  Concession,  nine  miles 
east  of  the  village  of  St.  Donis,  will  find  her  the 
happy  and  contented  wife  of  John  Baptiste  Arch- 
ambeau, enjoying  some  reminiscences  of  Maria 
Monk,  but  wholly  dead  to  the  memory  of  the  mur- 
dered St.  Francis.  The  evidence  of  Madame 
Archambeau  proves  that  the  residence  of  Monk  in 
and  about  the  parish  of  St.  Denis  was  extended  to 
the  month  of  July,  1834.  It  moreover  corroborates 
the  evidence  of  Mrs,  St.  Germain  and  of  Miche.el 
Guertin  on  the  entire  period  of  the  residence  of 
Maria  Monk  at  St.  Denis.  It  will  be  observed  that 
she  entered  the  service  of  Mrs.  St.  Germain  in  the 
autumn  of  1832,  and  that  she  lost  her  situation 
with  Miss  Bousquet  in  the  summer  of  1834. 

As  is  stated  in  the  d'^position  of  Miss  Bousquet, 
Monk  then  withdrew  from  St.  Denis.  It  cannot 
be  said  Monk's  vicious  propensities  slumbered  while 
she  was  in  the  country  ;  for  it  is  certain  that  the 
deponents  of  St,  Denis,  who  are  silent  on  her  moral 


r^ 


d8 


conduct  might  have  stated  much  against  it.  That 
she  was  a  girl  practised  in  evil,  may  be  inferred 
from  the  evidence  of  Cournoier,  commonly  called 
Mart  el  Paul. 

No.  6.     Evidence  of  Martel  Paul  Hus  Cournoier, 

District  of  Montreal : 

Personally  came  ana  appeared  before  me,  Edward  W.  Car- 
ter, one  of  his  Majesty's  Justices  for  the  District  of  Montreal,  Mar- 
tel Paul  Hns  Cournoier,  who  being  duly  sworn  on  the  Holy  Evan- 
gelists— declared, — 

That  deponent  was  personally  acquainted  witli  Maria  Monk, 
daughter  to  Mrs.  Monk,  house-keeper  of  the  Government  House  in 
the  city  of  Montreal ;  that  he  know  her  from  her  infancy,  and  was 
personally  acquained,  with  her  late  father,  W.  Monk,  Barrack  ■ 
master  at  St.  .lohn's,  Lower  Canada ;  and  that  he  was  personally 
acquainted  with  her  mother ;  that  deponent  alw  ays  beheved,  and 
did  still  believe,  that  the  said  Maria  was  the  proper  daughter  of 
the  said  Mrs.  IVFonk ;  that  deponent,  until  within  the  last  two  or 
three  years  had  always  been  in  the  habit  of  seeing  the  said  Ma- 
ria from  time  to  time;  that  deponent  had  know  not  her  residence 
at  various  places,  and  particularly  of  her  residence  at  Charles 
(jouin's,  and  Mrs.  Monk's  of  the  borough  of  Sorel;  and  also  of 
her  residence  at  Montreal ;  at  St.  Ours,  and  at  St.  Denis  ;  and  of 
simdry  voyages  performed  by  her  to  Quebec;  that  deponent 
knew  of  the  theft  committed  by  her  at  the  said  Mrs.  Monk's  of 
Sorel,  and  was  present  at  the  time  of  her  arrest  at  the  house  of 
a  person  named  Leclaire,  at  St.  Ours. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  from  the  age  of  fourteen 
or  fifteen  the  said  Maria  had  been,  acconling  to  the  belief  and 
information  of  deponent,  a  person  of  debauched  habits,  and  that 
her  illicit  intercourse  with  various  persons  known  to  deponent 
was  of  public  notoriety. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  it  was  not  the  belief  of  de- 
ponent that  the  said  Maria  had  been  at  any  time  an  inmate  of 
any  convent  whatever,  and  that  deponent  had  many  strong  and 
conclusive  reasons  for  beUeving  that  the  said  Maria  was  a  total 
stranger  to  the  convents  of  Lower  Canada.  And  further  depo- 
nent declared  not.  . . 

(Signed)  MARTEL  +  PAUL. 

mark. 
Taken  and  sworn  to  befere  me,  this  24th 
day  of  July,  1836. 

(Signed)  W.  CARTER,  J.  P. 


tpi 


J.  p. 


89 


This  affidavit  corroborates  moreover  the  evidence 
of  Mr.  Charles  Goiiin  and  Mrs.  Monk  of  Sorel, 
and  of  Mrs.  St.  Germain,  Michael  Guertin,  and 
Louise  Bousquct  of  St.  Denis. 

It  appears  that  Monk  proceeded  directly  from 
St.  Denis  to  Montreal,  for  on  the  12th  of  July, 
and  shortly  after  her  separation  from  Miss  Bous- 
quet,  we  find  her  entered  as  domestic  in  the  family 
of  Mr.  Lovis  of  that  city. 


of  de- 
late of 
fng  and 
I  total 
depo- 

lUL. 


No.  7.     Evidence  of  Charles  D,  S.  Lovis, 

Province  of  Loiver  Canada,  Vistrict  nf  Montreal : 

Before  me,  Pcfcr  Lukin,  one  of  his  Majesty's  Justices  of 
the  Reace  for  tlie  District  of  IMontreal,  appeared  Charles  D.  S. 
Lovis,  Watchmaker  and  Jeweller,  who,  on  making  oath  on  the 
Holy  Evangelists,  declared  : 

That  Maria  Monk  came  to  live  in  his  family  as  a  servant  girl, 
on  or  abontthe  I'ithofJuly,  1834,  and  remained  in  his  service  until 
the  7th  or  8th  of  August  of  the  samn  year ;  wlien  it  being  per- 
ceived that  she  was  often  deranged  in  hern^ind,  and  it  being  dis- 
covered that  her  conduct  and  charncter  were  notoriously  bad, 
she  was  discharged ;  that  the  said  Maria  Monk  stated  to  depo- 
nent, that  she  wished  to  become  a  Romaki  Catholic,  and  that  she 
was  preparing  to  be  baptized,  and  that  she  asked  deponent's  per- 
mission to  prepare  herself  in  his  house  for  that  purpose. 

(Signed)  CHARLES  D.  S.  LOVIS. 

Sworn  before  me,  at  Montreal,  the  8th  of 
July,  1836. 

(Signed)  P.  LUKLN,  J.  P. 

The  cholera  of  1834  broke  out  in  Montreal  on 
precisely  the  very  day  that  Maria  Monk  took  ser- 
vice in  the  family  of  Mr.  Lovis.  She  was  dismiss- 
ed from  the  employment  of  Mr.  Lovis  early  in  the 
month  of  x\ugtist,  and  shortly  after  performed  an 
expedition  to  Sorel ;  for  what  object  we  have  not 
troubled  ourselves  to  discover. 


8* 


90 


i        '  > 


No.  8.     Evidence  of  Lawrence  Kidd,  Esq* 

In  the  mimmer  of  1834  I  wan  coming  one  Sunday  morning 
from  my  cottage  in  the  Quebec  suburbs,  when  I  met  Capt.  Ryan, 
master  of  the  "Canadian  Patriot,"  steamer,  (^apt.  Ryan  inform- 
ed me  that  he  had  arrived  from  Quebec  that  morning ;  that  ho 
was  then  in  search  of  Maria  Monk,  who  had  come  up  with  him 
from  Sorel,  and  whom  he  suspected  of  having  sfxjlen  his  watch 
from  on  board  the  boat.  Capt.  Ryan  further  told  me,  tliat 
Monk  had  journeyed  in  his  boat  from  Sorel  to  Montreal ;  thatou 
coming  on  board  of  the  boat  previously  to  its  departure  from 
Sorel,  she  addressed  him  on  deck,  and  asked  him  if  ne  did  not  re- 
cognize her;  that  at  first  he  did  not,  but  afterwards  did  recog- 
nize her ;  and  being  acquainted  with  her  mother  as  well  as  with 
her  late  father,  and  having  taken  compassion  on  her  destitute 
condition,  he  sent  her  down  to  the  cabin.  And  further, 
Capt.  Ryan  informed  me,  that  on  the  arrival  of  the  steamer  at 
Montreal,  Maria  Monk  disappeared  without  communicating  with 
him,  and  that  he  had  reason  to  believe  that  she  had  stolen  his 
watch.  I  have  no  positive  knowledge  of  the  steps  taken  by  Capt. 
Ryan,  subsequently  to  my  conversation  with  him ;  but  am  un- 
der the  impression  that  Monk  successfully  evaded  his  search. 

I  saw  Capt.  Ryan  lately,  who  is  still  impressed  with  the  same 
idea,  that  she  was  the  person  who  stole  his  watch. 

(Signed)  LAWRENCE  KIDD. 

Mr.  Kidd  is  one  of  his  Majesty's  Justices  of  the 
Peace  for  the  District  of  Montreal.  It  does  not 
appear  from  the  evidence  of  Mr.  Kidd,  in  what 
month  of  the  summer  of  1834  Monk  made  the  jour- 
ney there  mentioned ;  but  by  recurring  to  the  evi- 
dence of  Miss  Bousquet,  as  to  the  time  of  her  with- 
drawal froni  her  service  (July),  and  to  the  evidence 
of  Mr.  Levis  as  to  the  time  of  her  entrance  into 
his  service  (12th  July),  it  will  be  perceived  that  the 
journey  must  have  been  made  subsequently  to  the 
8th  of  August.  It  is  doing  Monk  no  injury  to  be- 
lieve that  she  stole  Capt.  Ryan's  watch.  The 
unfortunate  woman  has  committed  crimes  which 
obscure  stealing. 

It  is  no  libel  to  write  Maria  Monk  a  thief. 


orniiig 
Ryan, 
inform- 
Uiat  ho 
ith  him 
s  watch 
no,  that 
that  uu 
e  from 
not  re- 
1  re  cog- 
as  with 
destitute 
further, 
earner  at 
inff  with 
tolen  liis 
by  Capt. 
am  un- 
»arch. 
the  same 

KIDD. 

of  the 
9es  not 
1  Avliat 
le  jour- 
he  evi- 
T  with- 
k^idencG 
ce  into 
;hat  the 

to  the 

to  be- 
.     The 

which 


91 


No.  9.     Evidence  of  Louis  MaJo, 

Province  of  Lower  Canada,  Dislrui,  of  Montreal: 

Personally  came  and  appeared  before  me,  I^awrenre  Kidd, 
Esq.,  one  of  his  Majesty's  Justices  of  the  Peace  for  the  said  dis- 
trict, this  twenty-fourth  day  of  March,  1836,  lAmin  Malo,  of  the 
city  of  Montreal,  in  the  said  district,  Constable,  who  after  being 
duly  swoni  on  the  Holy  Evangelists,  deposeth  and  saith,  that  on 
the  eleventh  day  of  October  of  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thou- 
sand eig'.  t  hundred  and  thirty-four,  a  warrant,  of  which  follows 
a  true  copy,  was  plr.ced  in  his  hands  for  execution — to  wit : 

•'PEACE  OFFICE. 
"  Province  of  Loujer  Canada,  District  of  Montreal : 

"  Joseph  Antoine  Gngnon,  Esquire,  one  of  the  Justices  of 
•'  our  Lord  the  King,  assigned  to  keep  the  peace  within  the  said 
*'  district. 

"To  the  High  Constable,  all  other  constables,  peace  officers, 
"and  others,  the  mini.sters  of  our  said  Lord  the  King  within  the 
"  said  hstrict,  and  to  every  of  them — Greeting : — 

"  Wherea.s,  a  woman  whose  name  is  unknown,  to  be  pointed 
"out  by  Jean  Baptiste  Girard,  of  the  parish  of  Varennes,  in  the 
"county  of  Verclieres  and  district  aforesaid,  Inn-keeper,  stands 
"  charged  upon  oath  with  having,  on  the  eighth  day  of  October 
"instant,  feloniously  taken,  stolen,  and  carried  away  from  the 
"  dwelling-house  of  the  said  .Fean  Baptiste  Girard,  a  silver  watch, 
"of  the  value  of  two  pounds  currency,  and  a  variety  of  wther 
"  goods  and  effects,  the  property  of  the  said  Jean  Baptiste  Girard. 

"These  are,  therefore,  to  autliorize  and  command  you,  or  aiiy 
"of  you,  in  his  3fajesty's  name,  forth  with  to  apprehend  and  bring 
"before  me,  or  some  other  of  his  3Iajesty's  Justices  of  the  peace 
"for  die  said  district,  the  body  of  the  said  woman;  further,  that 
"you  make  a  diligent  search  among  the  effects  of  the  said  wo- 
"  man,  for  the  said  stolen  goods :  to  answer  the  said  charge,  and 
"to  be  further  dealt  with  according  to  law.  Herein  fail  not.  Given 
"  under  my  hand  and  seal,  at  Montreal,  the  eleventh  day  of  Oc- 
"tober,  inthe  fifth  ypurof  his  Majesty's  reign." 

(Signed)  J.  A.  GAGNON,  J.  P. 

That  the  deponent  being  then  charged  with  the  execution  of 
the  said  warrant,  4id,  onthe  same  eleventh  day  of  October,  go  in 
pursuit  of  the  woman  therein  mentioned,  accompanied  by  the 
said  Jean  Baptiste  Girard,  and  overtook  her  at  the  parish  of  I^- 
chine,in  the  District  of  31ontreal,  at  a  distance  of  nine  milesfrom 
the  city  of  Montreal,  !=he  being  then  on  board  of  the  steam-boat 
Chateauffuay .  That  the  sai<l  woman  having  been  pointed  out  to 
deponent  by  the  said  .lean  Baptiste  Girard  as  being  the  woman 
mentioned  in  the  said  warrant;  he,  the  said  deponent,  by  virtue 
of  the  said  warrant,  made  her  a  prisoner,  and  took  her  into  his 
custody  and  keeping;  that  all  the  goods  stolen  from  the  said  Jean 
Baptiste  Girard  were  found  in  her  possessien,  part  of  which,  we- 


'I! 


92 


men's  clothes,  she  wore  on  her  person,  and  the  remainder  she 
carried  in  a  bundle,  with  the  exception  of  the  said  silver  watch 
and  a  veil,  which  she  stated  tiio  had  sold  in  Montreal  prior  to  her 
departure  from  there ;  and  that  she  would  show  to  the  deponent 
the  persons  to  whom  she  had  made  sale  of  them.  That  she  then 
named  lierself  3Iaria  MiUs,  and  on  the  road  to  Montreal,  about 
half  way  from  liachinc,  she  remarked  that  she  would  not  like  to 
be  seen  by  persons  who  were  working  in  a  field  adjacent  to  the 
road,  f\s  hor  uncb,  Tilr.  Mills,  lived  tliere.  Tliat  after  having  reach- 
ed Montreal,  she  took  the  deponent  and  the  said  Jean  haptisto 
Girard  to  the  jeweller's-shop  of  Messrs.  fc^avage  in  St.  Paul-street, 
stating  that,  she  had  sold  the  said  watch  there  for  the  sum  of  two 
dollars;  whicli  was,  on  the  application  to  Mr. lavage, immediate- 
ly returned  to  the  said  Jean  i3aptiste  Girard.  That  she  then  took 
tliem  to  a  house  in  the  St.  Ann  suburbs,  where  she  stated  she 
had  sold  the  veil ;  but  the  veil  could  not  be  obtained  there,  as  the 
people  denied  the  fact ;  tliat  she  was  then  taken  (that  night)  to 
!i  t  ivern  kept  by  one  William  Brown,  at  the  New-mark«t  of  this 
city,  and  thore  kept  during  the  night  under  the  ( harge  of  the  said 
Jean  Baptiste  Girard.  That  on  the  morning  following,  th^  depo- 
nent, the  said  Jean  Baptiste  Girard,  and  the  said  woman  who 
named  herself  Maria  Mills,  left  Montreal  for  the  parish  of  Va- 
rennes,  the  residenee  of  the  said  Jean  Baptiste  Girard,  fifteen 
miles  from  3Ioi'itreal,  and  hired  a  ferryman  named  Peter  Plouff 
to  convey  them  by  water  to  that  place.  That  after  having  reach- 
ed Varennes,  she  taxed  the  servant-maid  of  the  said  Girard  with 
having  stolen  the  said  effects,  and  given  them  to  her  in  a  bundle. 
That  the  said  Girard  and  hisfamily,  being  convinced  of  the  falsity 
of  the  story, did  not  behevc  her;  and  would  not  allow  her  to  sleep 
in  their  house  that  night;  when  deponent  was  obligee^  fj  provide 
lodgings  for  her  at  a  tavern  kept  by  a  widow  named  Therese  Del- 
fause.  That  on  the  morning  following,  the  said  Jean  Baptiste 
Girard  having  positively  declined  prosecuting  the  charge  any  fur- 
ther oil  account  of  the  respectability  of  her  family  and  her  youth, 
the  deponent  brought  her  back  to  Montreal.  That  whilst  at  Va- 
reimes,  she  told  the  said  depotient  that  her  real  name  was  Maria 
Monk,  and  that  she  was  the  <laughter  of  a  Mrs^  I^Ionk,  who  was 
living  at  the  Government  Hotise  in  tlie  city  of  Montreal;  which 
the  deponent  subsequently  ascertained  was  the  truth,  and  re- 
quested of  the  deponent  not  to  take  her  to  h«!r  motJier,  as  she  woidd 
chain  her  up  and  make  her  suffer  as  she  had  done  before.  Thf.l 
the  deponent  taking  pity  nn  her,  took  her  to  an  inn  kept  in  Com- 
missioners-street by  one  Richard  Ouston,  where  she  remained  two 
or  three  days ;  after  which  she  left  that  house,  and  the  deponent 
does  not  know  where  she  went  to ;  but  in  a  few  days  subsequent- 
ly, the  deponent  was  sent  for  by  a  young  boy,  who  told  him  there 
was  a  young  woman  at  the  New-markot,  in  a  tavern  ivcpt  by 
one  John  Irvin,  desirous  of  seeing  him.  Tha>  the  deponent  hav- 
ing gone  there  was  directed  to  a  room  in  which  he  foimdthe  said 


■ 


93 


Maria  Monk ;  who,  among  other  things,  told  the  deponent  that 
she  intended  leaving  for  Quebec.  Tnat  they  then  parted,  and 
the  deponent  never  heard  of  her  afterwards,  until  about  the  early 
part  of  the  month  of  September  last,  when,  on  arriving  home  in 
the  afternoon,  he  was  uifonned  that  the  servant  of  one  Josephine 
Raymond,  widow  of  the  late  John  George  Dagan,  had  come  there 
to  requect  the  deponent  to  go  to  the  said  Josephine  Raymond's 
residence;  that  there  was  a  younar  woman  there  from  New- York 
desirous  of  seeing  deponent.  That  the  deponent  having  gone 
there,  found  that  the  young  v»^oman  in  question  was  the  said  Ma- 
ria Mou';  before  mentioned.  That  she  then  told  the  deponent 
that  she  had  just  arrived  from  New- York,  with  her  friend,  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Iloyt ;  that  they  had  taken  lodguigs  at  Goodenough's 
hotel ;  but  that  she  had  run  away  from  him  and  left  him  his  child ; 
she  also  stated  that  she  did  not  know  how  to  get  her  clothes  from 
Goodenough's  hotel;  that  she  would  no  longer  live  with  the  said 
Hoyt,  as  she  did  not  like  him ;  and  that  she  womd  do  any  thing  soon- 
er tnan  return  v.ith  him,  the  said  Hoy  t.  The  deponent  then  advised 
her  to  return  toher  mother,  which  she  declined  doing.  That  on  the 
day  following,  the  deponent  saw  the  said  Maria  Monk  before  the 
house  of  the  said  widow  Dagan  in  a  calash,  with  a  person  of  gen- 
teel appearance,  whom  she  called  her  friend,  and  which  the  depo- 
nent took  to  be  the  said  Rev.  Mr.  Hoyt.  That  the  said  Joseplune 
BnyiKond,  wi(lo\«^  of  the  late  John  George  Dagan.  keops  a  house 
of  ill  fame  in  St.  Elizabeth-street,  of  the  city  of  Montreal.  That 
the  deponent  has  never  since  seen  the  said  Maria  Monk. 

(Signed)  LOUIS  MALO. 

Sworn  before  me,  at  Montreal,  the  day  and 
year  above  mentioned. 


(Signed) 


LAWRENCE  KIDD,  J.  P. 


From  the  affidavit  of  Malo,  it  appears  that  he 
knew  of  her  whereabouts  for  several  days  subsequent- 
ly to  the  11th  of  October,  1834.  The  elections  for 
the  city  of  Montreal  commenced  on  the  28th  of  the 
same  month,  and  the  riots  in  the  first  week  of  the 
following  month.  The  latter  were  continued 
tliroughout  nearly  the  whole  of  November.  On  the 
9th  of  November,  Monk  was  committed  to  i\w 
house  of  correction. 

No.  10.     Evidence  of  Doctor  Robertson, 

William  Robertson,  of  Montreal,  Doctor  in  Medicine,  being  du- 
ly fcworh  on  the  Holy  EvangeUsts,  deposeth  and  saith  tn  foll#wi : 


'nmm 


94 


On  the  9th  of  November,  1834,  three  men  came  up  to  my  house, 
having  a  young  female  in  company  with  them,  who,  they  said, 
was  observed  thM  forenoon,  on  the  bank  of  the  Canal,  near  the 
extremity  of  the  Su  Joseph  suburbs,  acting  in  a  manner  which  in- 
duced some  people  who  saw  her  to  think  that  she  intended  to 
drown  herself.  They  took  her  into  a  house  in  the  neighborhood, 
where,  after  being  there  some  hours,  and  interrogated  as  to  who 
she  was,  &c.,  she  said  she  was  the  daughter  of  Dr.  Robertson. 
On  receiving  this  information,  they  brought  her  to  my  houic. 
Bein;^  from  home  when  th^y  can.,  to  the  door,  and  learning  from 
Mrs.  llobertson  that  she  had  deceived  them,  they  conveyed  her 
to  the  watch-house.  On  returning  home  and  hearing  this  story, 
I  went  in  company  vnlh  G.  Auldjo,  t'sq.,  of  this  city,  to  the  vvutch- 
liouse  to  inquire  into  the  afliiir.  There  we  found  the  young  fe- 
male, whom  I  have  since  ascertained  to  be  Maria  3Ionk,  daugliter 
of  Mrs.  Monk  of  this  city,  in  custody.  She  said,  that  although 
she  was  not  my  daughter,  she  was  the  child  of  respectable  pa- 
rents in  or  very  near  Montreal,  who,  from  some  light  conduct  of 
hers,  (arising  from  temporary  insanity,  to  which  she  was  at  times 
subject  from  her  infancy,)  had  kept  her  confined  and  chained  in 
a  cellar  for  tbe  last  four  years.  Upon  examination,  no  mark  or 
appearance  indicating  the  wearing  of  manacles,  or  any  other 
mode  of  restraint,  could  be  discerned.  She  said,  on  my  observing 
this,  that  her  mother  always  took  care  to  cover  the  irons  with 
soft  cloths  to  prevent  them  injuring  the  skin.  From  the  appear- 
unco  of  her  hands,  she  evidently  had  not  been  used  to  work.  To 
remove  her  from  the  watch-house,  where  she  was  confined  with 
some  of  the  most  profligate  women  of  the  town,  taken  up  for  ine- 
briety and  disorderly  conduct  in  the  streets,  as  she  could  not  give 
a  satisfactory  account  of  herself,  I,  as  a  Justice  of  the  Peace,  sent 
her  to  jail  as  a  vagrant.  The  following  morning  I  went  to  the 
jail  for  the  purpose  of  ascertainig,  if  possible,  who  she  vva.s.  After 
considerable  persuasion,  she  promised  to  divulge  her  secret  to  the 
Rev.  H.  Esson,  one  of  the  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
to  whose  congregation  she  said  her  parents  belonged.  That  gen- 
tleman did  caU  at  the  jail,  and  ascertain  who  she  was.  In  the 
course  of  a  few  days  shf;  was  released,  and  I  did  not  see  her  again 
until  the  month  of  August  last,  when  Mr.  Johnston,  joiner,  and 
Mr.  Cooley,  of  the  St.  Ann  Subiubs,  merchant,  called  upon  me 
about  ten  o'clock  at  night,  and,  after  some  prefatory  remarks, 
mentioned  that  the  object  of  their  visit  was,  to  ask  me,  as  a  ma- 
gistrate, to  institute  an  intjuiry  into  some  very  serious  charges 
which  had  been  made  agamstsome  of  the  Roman  Catholic  priefit.s 
of  the  place  and  the  nuns  of  the  General  Hospital,  by  a  female, 
who  had  been  a  mm  in  that  institution  for  four  years,  and  who 
had  divulged  the  horrible  secrets  of  that  establishment,  such  as 
the  illicit  and  criminal  intercourse  between  the  nuns  and  the 
priests,  stating  particulars  of  such  depravity  of  conduct  on  the 
port  of  these  people,  and  their  murdering  the  o^spriug  of  these 


ny  house, 
they  said, 
near  the 
which  in- 
tended to 
iborhood, 
as  to  who 
lobertson. 
ny  house, 
iting  from 
^eyed  her 
this  story, 
he  vvutch- 
young  fe- 
,  daughter 
although 
ctable  pa- 
jonduct  of 
IS  at  times 
chained  in 
a  mark  or 
any  other 
observing 
rons  with 
he  appcar- 
work.  To 
fined  with 
ID  for  inc- 
d  not  give 
eace,  sent 
ent  to  the 
vas.  After 
[^retto  the 
Scotland, 
That  gen- 
.    In  the 
her  again 
oiner,  and 
upon  me 
'  remarks, 
as  a  nia- 
1  charges 
>hc  pricKt.s 
a  female, 
and  who 
t,  such  as 
and  the 
ct  on  the 
g  of  these 


95 


criminal  connections  as  soon  as  they  were  bom,  to  the  number 
of  from  thirty  to  forty  every  year.  I  instantly  said  that  I  did  not 
believe  a  word  of  what  they  told  me,  and  that  they  must  have 
been  imposed  unon  by  some  evil  disposed  and  designing  person. 
Upon  inqriry  w-ho  this  nun,  their  informant,  was,  1  discovered 
that  she  answered  exactly  the  description  of  Maria  Monk,  who  I 
had  so  much  trouble  about  last  year ;  and  mentioned  to  these  in- 
dividuals my  suspicion,  and  what  I  knew  of  that  unfortunate  girl. 
Mr.  Cooley  said  to  Mr.  Johnston,  let  us  go  homo,  we  are  hoaxed. 
They  told  me  that  she  was  then  at  Mr.  jc)hnston's  house,  and  re- 
quested me  to  call  there,  and  hear  her  own  story.  The  next  day, 
or  the  day  following,  I  did  call,  and  saw  Maria  Monk,  at  Mr.  John- 
ston's house.  She  repeated  in  my  presence  the  suhstrtuce  of 
what  was  mentioned  to  me  before,  relating  to  her  having  been  in 
the  nunnery  for  four  yea/s ;  having  taken  the  black  veil ;  the 
rrimes  committed  there ;  and  a  variety  of  oiher  cirounistances 
concernino^  the  conduct  of  the  priests  and  nuns.  A  Mr.  Hoyte 
was  introduced  to  me,  and  was  present  during  the  whole  of  the 
time  that  I  was  in  the  hou.se.  lie  wan  represented  as  one  of  the 
persons  who  had  come  in  from  NriVV-VorK  with  this  young  wo- 
man, for  the  purpose  of  investigating  into  this  mysterious  affair. 
I  was  asked  to  take  her  deposition,  on  oath,  as  to  the  truth 
of  what  she  had  stated.  I  tleclined  doing  so,  giving  as  a  rea- 
son, that,  from  my  knowledge  of  iier  character,  I  considered  her 
deposition  upon  oath  not  entitled  to  more  credit  tha.*.  her  htu-e  as- 
sertion, and  that  I  did  not  believe  either ;  intimating,  at  the  same 
time,  my  willingness  to  take  the  necessary  step;?  for  a  full  inves- 
tigation, if  I'ley  could  get  any  other  pei-son  to  corroborate  any 
part  of  her  testimony,  or  if  a  direct  cliarge  were  made  against 
any  particular  individual  of  a  criminal  nature.  During  the  firait 
interview  with  ^Messrs.  Johnston  and  Cooley,  tiiey  mentioned  that 
Maria  Monk  had  been  found  in  New-Vork  in  a  very  destitute  .situ- 
ation by  some  charitable  individuals,  who  administered  to  her  ne- 
ressities ;  that  being  very  sick,  she  expressed  a  wish  to  see  a  cler- 
gyman, as  she  had  a  dreadfid  secret  which  she  wished  to  divulge 
before  she  died.  A  clergyman  visiting  her,  .she  related  to  him  the 
alleged  crimes  of  the  pnesi.s  and  nuns  of  the  (icnoral  Hospital  at 
M(mtreal.  'I'hat  al'ter  her  recovery  she  w  as  visited  and  examined 
by  the  mayor  and  some  lawyers  at  New-Vork,  afterwards  at  Troy 
in  the  State  of  New-Vorii,  on  the  subject ;  and  I  understood  them 
to  say,  that  Hoyte  and  two  other  gentlemen,  (me  of  tiiem  a  law- 
yer, were  sent  to  Montreal  with  her  for  the  purpose  of  examining 
into  the  truth  of  the  accusations  thus  made.  Although  incredu- 
lous as  to  the  truth  of  Muria  Monk's  story,  1  thought  it  incumbent 
upon  me  to  make  some  inquiry  concerning  it,  and  have  ascertain- 
ed where  she  had  been  residing,  a  great  part  of  the  time  slie  states 
having  been  an  inmate  of  the  nunnery.  During  the  summer  of 
1832  she  was  at  service  in  William  Henry  ;  the  winters  of  1832-3 
the  passed  in  tliis  neighborhood,  at  St.  Ours  atid  St.  Deni.s.    Tito 


96 


account*  given  of  her  conduct  that  season  corroborate  the  opi- 
nions I  had  before  entertained  of  her  character. 

W.  ROBERTSON. 
fclwom  before  me,  at  Montreal,  this  14th  day 
of  November,  1835. 

BENJ.  HOLMES,  J.  P. 

The  date  of  her  liberation  is  not  mentioned  in 
Doctor  Robertson's  affidavit ;  but  on  referring  to 
tlie  jail  record,  the  order  for  her  discharge  was 
found  entered  on  the  19th  of  November. 

There  are  four  periods  mentioned  in  the  "  Dis- 
closures," at  which  it  is  pretended  that  Monk  was 
an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu.  We  shall  notice 
them  in  the  order  we  find  them,  and  in  the  identi- 
cal language  of  the  narrative. 

Period  first,  refers  to  a  story  related  to  Monk  by 
Jane  Ray,  "on  new  year's  day,  1834."  (page  192.) 
The  evidence  of  Miss  Bousquet  (No,  5)  conclusively 
proves  that  Monk  was  in  her  employment  previ- 
ously to  that  date,  at  that  date,  and  for  months  sub- 
sequently. 

Period  second,  refers  to  the  election  riots,  and  is 
mentioned  at  page  192  as  one  of  the  few  occasions 
"  in  which  the  nuns  knew  any  thing  that  was  happen- 
ing in  the  world."  Within  the  recollection  of  Ma- 
ria Monk  there  have  been  two  "  election  riots"  in 
the  city  of  Montreal,  one  in  May,  1832,  and  the 
other  in  November,  1834.  The  evidence  of  Mr. 
Gouin(No.  1) conclusively  proves,  that  inMay,  1832, 
she  was  in  his  service,  as  a  menial.  The  evidence 
of  Dr.  Robertson  (No.  10),  and  concurrent  evidence, 
prove  conclusively,  that  in  November,  1834,  her 
life  v/as  varied  by  street  vagrancy  and  imprison, 
ment. 

Period  third,"  or  cholera  season  of  1832,  is  men- 
tioned inclusively  with  period  fourth  at  page  192, 


97 


the  opU 
SON. 

,  J.P. 

aed  in 
ing  to 
yQi  was 

«  Dis- 

ik  was 
notice 
identi- 

3nk  by 
3  192.) 
usively 
previ- 
iis  sub- 

and  is 
lasions 
appen- 
ofMa- 
ots"  in 
nd  the 
of  Mr. 
1832, 
ddence 
idence, 
34,  her 
prison. 

s  men. 
i  192. 


^  The  appearance  of  the  cholera  in  both  cases  of 
its  ravages,  gave  us  abundance  of  occupation." 

The  evidence  of  Mr.  Gouin  (No.  1)  conclusively 
proves,  that  in  the  cholera  season  of  1832,  Maria 
Monk  was  residing  at  Sorel,  and  in  his  house. 

Period  fourth,  or  cholera  season  of  1834 — ^The 
evidence  of  Mr.  Lovis  (No.  6)  and  concurrent  evi- 
dence prove  that  Maria  Monk  spent  one  part  of  the 
cholera  season  at  service,  and  the  remainder  as  a 
vagrant  thief. 

What  remains  ? 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

Documentary  evidence  provinsr  thai :'('  the  maferlal  aUegations  of  Hie 
**  Awful  Visclosures^^^  concerning  persoiis  and  things,  are  utter 
and  absolute  falsehoods. 

Shortly  after  her  liberation  from  jail,  Maria 
Monk  became  an  inmate  of  the  Asylum  for  repent- 
ant females,  managed  and  conducted  by  the  exem- 
plary and  charitable  Mrs.  McDonell.  Mrs.  Mc 
DonellVj  affidavit  exposes  the  source  of  the  fool- 
ish and  childish  fabrications  regarding  conventual 
discipline,  which  occupy  more  than  one  half  of  the 
"Disclosures."  ^ 

,  No.  11.     Evidence  of  Mrs,  McDonell 

Province  of  Lower  Canada,  District  of  Montreal: 
.    Before  me,  Adam  L.  Macnider,  one  of  the  Justices  of  the 
Peace  for  the  District  of  Montreal,  appealed  Agathe  Henrietta 
Huguet  Latour,  widow  of  the  late  Duncan  Cameron  McDonell, 
who,  after  making  oath  on  the  Holy  Evangelists — declared : 

That  for  six  years  past,  she  had  conducted  and  managed  an  in- 
stitution in  the  city  of  Montreal,  commonly  known  and  distin- 

9 


« 


•^mm 


rrm 


iCM 


99 


guished  as  the  Magdalen  Asylum ;  that  about  the  close  of  the 
month  of  November,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty -four, 
Maria  Monk,  daughter  of  Mrs.  W.  Monk,  house-keeper  of  the 
Government  House,  in  the  city  of  Montreal,  entered  the  said 
asylum,  and  became  an  inmate  thereof;  that  she  understood  that 
the  said  Maria  had,  for  many  years,  led  the  lil'o  of  a  stroller  and 

{)rostitnte ;  and  that  she  received  her  into  the  asylum  with  the 
lope  of  effecting  her  reformation ;  that  in  the  progress  of  her  ac- 
quaintance with  the  character  of  the  said  Maria,  she  found  it  to  bo 
A     very  uncertain,  and  grossly  deceitful ;  but  thai  she  did,  npverth(>- 
less,  persevere  in  her  efforts  to  reclaim  her  to  the  path«  of  virtue 
and  morality. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  having  been  informed  that 
the  said  ^^aria  had  held  conversation  with  a  man  who  h:id  reach- 
ed the  yard  of  the  asylum,  by  scaling  I  he  enclosures,  she  sent 
for  the  said  Maria,  and  severely  reprimamled  lier ;  pointing  out, 
that  her  holding  such  communication  was  in  direct  violation  of 
the  rules  of  the  institution,  and  did  moreover  indicate  a  dispofii- 
tion  to  relapse  into  her  vicious  courses;  that  the  said  3faria  was 
not  toucheu  by  the  remonstrances  addressed  to  her,  but  hecame 
more  indecorous  in  her  conduct  every  day  ;  and  that  finally,  de- 
ponent was  compelled  to  plismiss  her  from  the  asylum.  That  the 
said  Maria,  be<«)re  her  dismissal,  did  appear  discontented  with  her 
residence  ther»  ;  but  that  deponent  would  not  consen*  to  her 
withdrawal  without  the  consent  of  the  said  Mrs.  Monk,  who  was 
accordingly  informed  of  her  daughter's  conduct,  and  of  her  desire 
to  withdraw  from  the  asylum. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe, 
that  the  man  with  whom  the  said  Maria  communicated,  during 
her  stay  at  the  asylum,  was  Louis  Malo,  Constable  of  the  courts 
of  the  city  of  Montreal ;  having  been  so  informed  by  the  said  Ma- 
ria herself.  And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  liad  reason 
to  believe  that  the  said  Maria  was  in  a  stale  of  pregnancy  at  the 
time  she  entered  the  asylum.  And  deponent  farther  jleclaied, 
that  the  said  Maria  was  dismissed  from  the  said  asylum  aboutlhe 
beginning  of  the  month  of  March,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty- 
five;  and  withdrew,  as  this  deponent  had  been  informed,  to  her 
mother's  house. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  read  the  pamphlet 
entitled  "Awful  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk:"  and  that  deponent 
was  thereby  informed,  for  the  first  time,  that  the  said  Maria  had 
been  at  any  time  an  inmate  of  a  convent ;  that  the  said  Maria,  at 
the  time  she  was  in  the  Magdalen  Asylum,  did  never  preteml  to 
deponent,  or' any  one  else,  according  to  the  information  and  belief 
.  of  deponent,  that  she  had  been  an  inmate  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  Con- 
vent, or  of  any  other  convent  whatever;  but  that  deponent  al- 
ways understood  and  believed  that  she  had,  for  many  years,  led 
the  life  of  a  vagrant  and  disorderly  person. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  phe  had  reason  to  believe 


99 


that  the  name  "Fougnee,"  mentioned  in  the  said  "Disclosures," 
is  mis-spe!f  for  Fournier  ;  and  that  at  the  time  the  said  Maria  was 
at  the  asyhim,  Miss  Hypolyte  Fournier  and  Miss  Clotilde  Four- 
nier, two  sisteis,  wore  assistants?  to  deponent  in  the  management 
ofihn  a.sylinn,  and  tliat  deponent  believed  them  to  be  identical 
with  the  persons  named  in  the  said  "Disr'osures"  as  the  "two 
Miss  Fougnces." 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe 
the  person  named  "Miss  Howard,"  in  the  said  "Disclosures,"  to 
bo  identical  with  a  person  bearing  that  name  who  lived  at  the 
^syinm  contemporaneously  with  the  said  Mario. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe, 
and  therefore  did  believe,  the  person  named  "Jane  McCoy,"  in 
the  f'.aid  "Disclosures,"  to  be  identical  with  a  person  bearing  that 
name,  who  lived  at  the  asylum  contemporaneously  with  the  said 
Maria. 

And  <.eponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe, 
and  did  believe,  the  person  named  "  Jane  Ray"  in  the  said  "Dis- 
closures," to  be  identical  with  a  person  bearing  that  name,  who 
lived  at  the  asy!  im  contemporaneously  with  the  said  Maria. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe, 
and  did  believe,  the  person  desighated  in  the  said  "  Disclosures" 
as  "one  of  my  cousins,  who  lived  at  Lachine,  named  Reed,"  to 
be  identical  with  a  person  named  Reed  who  lived  at  the  asylum 
contemporaneously  with  the  said  Maria. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  many  of  the  rules  and 
habits  of  conventual  life  were  in  use  and  practice  at  the  asylum 
at  the  time  the  said  Maria  was  an  inmate  thereof;  and  that  she 
had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  believe,  that  so  much  of  the  said 
"Disclosures"  as  related  to  conventual  discipline,  is  an  incorrect 
representation  of  what  the  said  Maria  saw  and  learned  at  the  said 
asyhim. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  reason  to  believe, 
and  did  believe,  that  the  description  ^iven  in  the  said  "  Disclo- 
sures," of  the  interior  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  is  an  incorrect  descrip- 
tion of  the  apartments  of  the  said  asylum,  of  which  the  said  Ma- 
ria was  for  some  time  an  inmate,  as  is  hereinbefore  mentioned; 
and  further  deponent  declared  not.     (Signed) 

AGATIIE  HENRIETTE  HUGUET  LATOUR. 

Ve.  D.  C.  McDONELL. 

Sworn  before  me,  this  27th  day  of 
July, 1836. 

(Signed)  ADAM  L.  MACNIDER,  J.  P. 

This  lady's  name  does  not  appear  in  the  **  Dis- 
closures," and  we  regret  to  be  compelled  to  Intro- 


100 


;f  i 


duce  it  in  connection  with  the  nauseous  criminality 
of  Monk  and  her  supporters. 

The  mention  of  the  "  two  Misses  Fougnees"  oc- 
curs at  page  34  of  ^he  "  Disclosures." 

No.  12.     Evidence  of  Miss  Hypolyte  Fournier, 

District  of  Mfintrealy  Province  of  Lower  Canada: 

Hypolyte  Fournier,  spinster,  being  duly  sworn,  deposeth 
and  saith,  that  she  is  acquainted  with  tlie  contents  of  the  pam- 
phlet, entitled  "Awful  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk;"  that  she  hath 
reason  to  beheve,  and  doth  believe,  the  said  Maria  to  be  identi- 
cal with  a  person  bearing  that  name,  who  was  an  inmate  of  the 
institution  commonly  known  as  the  Magdalen  Asylum,  of  the  city 
of  Montreal,  from  the  month  of  November  eighteen  hundred  and 
thirty-four,  to  the  month  of  March  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  :  and  that  deponent  hath  reason  to  believe,  and  doth  be- 
lieve, the  persons  designated  in  the  said  "  Disclosures"  as  "  The 
two  Miss  Fougnees,"  to  be  identical  with  deponent  and  her  sister 
Clotilde  Fournier. 

And  deponent  further  saith,  that  slie  was  an  inmate  of  the  said 
Asylum,  as  assistant  to  Mrs.  McDonell,  during  the  whole  period 
of  ihe  stay  of  the  said  Maria  therein,  and  that  the  acquaintance 
of  deponent  with  the  said  Maria  commenced  and  ended  at  the 
said  Asylum. 

And  deponent  further  said,  that  she  hath  never  understood,  ex- 
cept from  recent  public  repoi;t,  that  the  said  Maria  had  been  at 
any  time  an  ramate  of  any  convent  whatever,  but  that  depo- 
nent hath  ahv^ays  understood,  that  previously  to  her  entrance  in- 
to the  said  Asylum,  the  said  Maria  had  led  the  life  of  a  common 
stroller.    And  further  deponent  saith  not. 

HYPOLYTE  FOURNIER. 

Sworn  before  me,  at  Lachine, 

this  30th  day  of  July,  1835.  DOND.  DUFT,  J.  P. 

The  younger  sister  of  this  lady  is  the  "  St,  Clo. 
tilde"  of  the  "  Disclosures." 

No.  13.     Evidence  of  Miss  Clotilde  Fournier. 

District  of  Montreal,  Province  of  Lower  Canada : 

Clotilde  Fournier,  spinster,  being  duly  sworn,  deposeth  and 
saith,  that  she  is  acquainted  with  the  contents  of  the  pamphlet 
•ntitled  "  Awful  Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk,"  that  she  hath  rea- 
son to  beUeve,  and  doth  believe,  the  said  Maria  to  bo  identical 
with  a  person  bearing  that  name,  who  was  an  inmate  of  the  in- 


101 


linality 


ses"  oc- 


rnier. 


deposetli 
the  pam- 
i  she  hath 
t>e  identi- 
ite  of  the 
3f  the  city 
idred  and 
nd  thirty- 
doth  be- 
'  as  "  The 
her  sister 

f  the  said 
ale  period 
uaintance 
ed  at  the 

stood,  ex- 
i  been  at 
hat  depo- 
trance  in- 
i  common 

INIER. 

T,  J.  P. 

fet.  Clo. 


mier. 


Mjseth  and 

pamphlet 

hftth  rea- 

)  identical 

of  the  in- 


stitution rommonly  known  as  the  3Iagdalen  Asylum  of  the  city 
f)f  Montreal,  from  the  month  of  iNovrmber  eighteen  hundred 
iMid  thirty-four,  to  the  motilh  of  JMarcli  eighteen  hundred  and 
thtrty-live,  and  that  doponont  hath  r'jason  to  believe,  and  doth 
bolievo,  tiu'  persons  designated  in  the  paid  "  Disclosures"  as  the 
"  two  iMis;<  Font^nees,"  to  be  identical  with  deponent  and  her  sis- 
ter ITypolyte  Fournier. 

And  deponent  further  saith  that  she  was  an  inmate  of  the  said 
Asylum,  as  as!sistnnt  to  Mrs.  MeDouell,  during  the  whole  periofl 
of  the  htay  of  the  said  Maria  therein,  and  that  the  acquaintance 
of  deponent  with  the  said  Maria  commenced  and  ended  at  the 
said  Afiyhmi. 

And  deponent  furtlier  saith,  that  she  Jiath  never  understood,  ex- 
cept from  recent  public,  report,  tiiat  the  said  Maria  had  been  at 
any  lime  an  inma  of  any  convent  whatever,  but  that  depo- 
nent huth  always  understood  that  previously  t(»  her  entrance 
into  the  said  Af^ylnm,  the  said  Maria  had  led  the  life  of  a  com- 
mon stroller.     And  further,  deponent  saith  not. 

CLOTILDE  FOURNIER. 

Sworn  before  me,  at  Lachine,  this 
30th  day  of  July,  1835.  DOND.  DUFT   J.  P. 

The  evidence  of  both  of  these  ladies  is  corrobo- 
ratcnl  bv  the  aflidavit  of  Mrs,  McDoneil. 

The  deponent  in  the  following  affidavit,  is  the 
"  Miss  Howard"  mentioned,  in  conjunction  with  the 
"  two  Miss  Fotignees,"  as  the  "  fellow-pupil"  of  Monk 
in  the  Congregational  Nunnery,  and  her  subse- 
tjucnt  fellow-novice  at  the  Hotel  Dieu. 

No.  14.     Evidence  of  Mary  Ann  Howard, 

Province  of  Loiner  Cnnoda,  District  of  Mont  real: 

Before  me,  Adam  L.  Macnider,  one  of  his  Majesty's  .Tus- 
tiees  of  the  Peace  for  the  District  of  Montreal,  appeared  Mary 
Ann  Howard,  who,  after  making  oath  on  the  Holy  EvangcUsts, 
declared : 

That  the  eonten^s  of  the  pamphlet  entitled,  "  Awful  Disclosures 
of  Maria  Monk,"  had  been  communicated  to  her :  that  she  had 
reason  to  believe,  and  did  believe,  the  said  "  Maria  Monk,"  to  bo 
identical  with  a  person,  bearing  that  name,  who  was  an  inmate 
of  the  iiif^tiiution  commonly  known  as  the  Magdalen  Asylum  of 
the  city  of  ^lontreal,  from  the  month  of  November  eighteen  hun- 
dred and  thirty-four,  to  the  month  of  March  eighteen  hundred 
and  thirty-five  ;  that  deponent  had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  be- 


■Tpi 


102 


liev©,  the  person  designated  as  "  Miss  Howanl  from  Vormont," 
in  the  said  "  Disclosures,"  to  be  identical  with  deponent. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  was  an  inmate  of  ihe 
»!aid  Asylum  during  the  entire  period  of  the  said  Maria  Monk's 
stay  therein;  and  that  her  acquaintance  with  the  said  Maria 
commenced  and  ended  at  the  said  asylum. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  never  been  at  any 
time  an  inmate  of  any  convent  whatever. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  Maria  was  in  the 
habit  of  holdinisf  frequent  conversations  with  deponent  on  the 
events  of  her  life  ;  that  among  other  things  she  mformed  depo- 
iient  of  her  residence  at  St.  Denis  and  at  Sorol,  and  also  of  sun- 
dry voyages  to  Quebec,  performed  by  her ;  that  she  informed  de- 
ponent of  her  state  of  pregnancy,  and  that  she  attributed  her  con- 
dition to  Louis  Malo,  one  of  the  Constables  of  the  courts  of  Mon- 
treal ;  that  she  informed  deponent  that  she  had  cohabited  with 
the  said  Louis  a  ghort  time  previously  to  her  entrance  into  tho 
Asylum ;  and  that  she  mentioned  particularly  that  the  said  Louis 
had  placed  her  in  a  tavern  kept  by  Richard  Ouston,  at  the  cor- 
ner of  St.  Joseph  and  Commissioner  streets,  where  the  said  Louis 
frequently  visited  her ;  that  she  mentioned  particularly  that  the 
jsaid  Louis  visited  her  at  the  said  tavern  for  illicit  purposes,  on  the 
seventeenth  day  of  October,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
thirty-five  ;  such  day  being  commonly  known  as  the  dark  day. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  Maria  communi- 
cated to  deponent  the  conversation  held  by  her  with  the  said 
Louis,  as  described  in  Mrs.  McDoncU's  affidavit ;  the  contents  of 
which  deponent  declared  herself  to  be  accjuainted  with;  that 
the  said  Maria  further  informed  deponent  that  the  said  Louis,  at 
the  time  of  the  said  cor  versation,  gave  to  her  a  gold  ring,  and  of- 
fered her  many  inducrments  to  quit  the  asylum.  \ 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  Maria  pretended 
to  deponent  that  she  had  been  confimed  in  the  summer  of  eighteen 
hundred  and  thirty-four,  at  the  Bishop's  Church  in  the  city  of 
Montreal ;  that  she  further  pretended  to  deponent,  that  she  w  as 
guilty  of  a  sacrilege  at  the  time  of  such  confinnation,  in  having 
concealed  at  confession,  a  certain  sin  committed  by  her  at  a  ball, 
which  she,  the  said  Maria,  had  attended. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  3Iaria,  during  her 
residence  at  the  said  Asylum,  did  never  pretend  to  deponent,  or  to 
any  other  person,  according  to  the  information  and  belief  of  depo- 
nent, that  she  had  been  any  time  an  inmate  of  a  convent ;  but 
that  deponent  always  understood,  as  well  from  the  confessions  of 
the  saia  Maria  as  from  other  fc  urces,  that  she  had,  previously  to 
her  entrance  into  the  asylum,  led  the  Ufe  of  a  stroller  ;  and  fur- 
ther deponent  declared  not.  . 

(Signed)  MARY  ANN -f  HOWARD. 

mark. 
Sworn  before  me,  this  27th  day  of  July,  1837. 

ADAM  L.  MACNIDER.  J.  P. 


108 


srmont," 

te  of  ihfi 
I  Monk's 
d  Maria 

in  ot  any 

18  in  the 
on  the 
3d  depo- 
)  of  sun- 
rmed  He- 
he  r  con- 
of  Mon- 
tcd  with 
into  tho 
lid  Louis 
the  cor- 
lid  Louis 
that  the 
(s,  on  the 
red  and 
k  day. 
jmmuni- 
the  said 
ntents  of 
ith;  that 
Louis,  at 
;,  and  of- 

'etended 
eighteen 
e  city  of 
she  was 
I  havin(T 
at  a  ball, 

iring  her 
3nt,  or  to 
of  depo- 
3nt;  but 
ssions  of 
iously  to 
and  fur- 


ARD. 


The  deponent  in  the  following  affidavit  is  Jane 
McCoy,  who,  it  is  stated  at  page  36,  sat  "  one  time 
by  a  window"  with  Monk  in  the  Hotel  Dieu  con- 
vent. 

No.  15.     Evidence  of  June  McCoy. 

District  of  Montreal,,  Promnce  of  Lower  Canada: 

Before  me,  Adam  L.  Macnidor,  one  of  his  Majesty's  Jus- 
tices of  the  Peace  for  thr  district  of  Montreal,  appeared  Jane  Mc 
Coy,  who,  after  majiing  oath  on  the  Holy  >:0vangelist8,  declared, 

"That  tho  contents  of  tl>.e  j)aniphlet,  entitled  "  Awful  Disclo- 
sures of  Maria  Monk,"  had  betMi  communicated  to  her;  that  she 
had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  believe,  the  said  "  Maria  Monk"  to 
be  identical  with  a  jierson  boarins?  that  name,  who  was  an  inmate 
of  the  institution  commonly  known  as  tlie  MagdrJen  Asylum  of 
the  city  of  Montreal,  from  the  month  of  ISovember  eighteen  hun- 
dred and  thirty-four,  to  the  montlx  of  March  eighteen  hundred  and 
thirty-five  ;  that  deponent  had  reas-on  to  believe,  and  did  believe, 
the  person  designated  as  "  Jane  3icCoy"  in  the  said  "  Disclo- 
sures," to  be  identical  with  deponent. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  was  an  inmate  of  the 
said  Asyhim  during  the  entire  period  of  the  said  Maria  Monk's 
stay  therein ;  and  that  her  acquaintance  with  the  said  Maria 
commenced  and  ended  at  the  said  Asylum. 

And  deponent  furtlier  declared,  tliat  she  had  never  been  at  any 
lime  an  inmate  of  any  convent  whatever. 

And  deponent  furtjier  declared,  that  the  said  Maria  was  in  the 
habit  of  holding  frequent  conversations  with  deponent  on  the 
events  of  her  life — that  among  other  things  she  informed  deponent 
of  her  residence  at  St.  Denis  and  at  Sorel,  and  elso  of  sundry 
voyages  to  Quebec,  performed  by  her;  that  she  informed  depo- 
nent of  her  state  of  pregnancy,  and  that  she  attributed  her  condi- 
tion to  Louis  Malo,  one  of  the  constables  of  the  court,  of  Montreal ; 
that  she  informed  deponent  that  slie  had  cohabited  with  the  said 
Louis  a  short  time  previously  to  her  entrance  into  the  Asylum, 
and  that  she  mentioned  particularly  that  the  said  Louis  had  placed 
her  in  a  tavern  Itept  by  Richard  (Juston,  at  the  corner  of  St. 
Joseph  and  Commissioner  streets,  where  the  said  Louis  frequently 
visited  her ;  that  she  mentioned  particularly  that  the  said  Louis 
visited  her  at  the  said  tavern  for  illicit  purposes  on  the  seven- 
teenth day  of  October  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-five, 
such  day  being  »  .mmon'y  known  as  the  dark  day. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  3Iaria  communi- 
cated to  deponent  the  conversation  held  by  her  with  the  said 
Louis,  as  described  in  Mrs.  McDonell's  affidavit,  the  contents  of 


•  «!•   X  • 


■pwi 


104 


which  tlepoiient  ricchired  hcrfiolf  to  he  a<Miuainteil  wiih;  that  the 
6ui(l  Miiria  further  infornicil  deponent  that  the  Miid  Louis,  at  the 
time  of  tlie  saitl  conversation,  f;ave  in  her  a  gold  ring,  and  oficred 
her  many  iiuhjcemenls  to  qnit  the  Asylnm. 

yVnd  dqwnent  further  (hM-lared,  ihat  .lie  paid  Maria  preiendeil 
to  deponent  that  ^he  had  been  eonfirnie*!  in  the  summer  of  eigh- 
teen hundred  and  ihirty-four  at  the  lh.><hop's  Church  in  the  city 
of  Montreal ;  that  hhe  further  pretended  to  deponent  that  she 
>vaH  guilty  of  a  sacrilege  at  the  time  of  such  confirmation,  in  having 
concealed  at  confession  a  certain  sin  commillcd  by  her. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  said  Maria,  during  her 
residence  at  the  eaid  Asylum,  did  never  pretend  to  deponent,  or 
to  any  other  person,  according  to  the  information  and  belief  of  de- 
ponent, that  she  had  been  at  any  time  an  inmate  of  a  convent ;  but 
that  deponent  always  understood  as  well  from  the  confession  of 
the  said  Maria  as  from  other  sources,  that  she  had  previously  to 
her  entrance  into  the  Asylum  led  the  Ul'c  of  a  stroller  ;  and  fur- 
ther deponent  declared  not. 

JEAN  iMcKAY. 

Sworn  before  me,  this  27th  day 
of  July,  1835.  .     ADAM  L.  MACMDER,  J.  P. 

The  deponent  in  the  following  aflidavit  is  Jane 
Ray,  who  occupies  so  conspicuous  a  place  in  the 
"Disclosures"  as  the  freakish  "old  nun." 


No.  16.     Evidence  of  Jane  Ray, 

#■ 

Province  of  Lower  Canada,  Diffrict  of  Monfrtal : 

Before  me,  Adam  L.  Macnider,  one  of  his  Majesty's  Justi- 
ces of  the  Peace  for  the  District  of  31ont  real,  appeared  Jane  Ray, 
who,  after  making  oath  on  the  Holy  Evangelists,  declared  : 

That  the  contents  of  the  pamphlet,  entitled  the  "vVwful  Disclot 
sures  of  Maria  Monk,"  had  been  communicated  to  her  ;  that  she 
had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  believe,  the  said  Maria  Monk  to  be 
identical  with  a  person  bearing  that  name,  who  was  an  inmate  of 
the  institution  commonly  known  as  the  Magdalen  Asylum  of  the 
city  of  Montreal,  from  the  jnonth  of  Novernber  eighteen  hundred 
and  thirty-four,  to  the  month  of  March  eigiueen  htmdrcd  and 
thirty -five ;  and  that  deponent  had  reason  to  believe,  and  did  be- 
lieve, that  the  person  named  *'Jane  Ray"  in  the  said  "Disclo- 
sures," to  be  identical  with  the  deponent. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  was  an  inmate  of  the 
said  Asylum  during  the  entire  period  of  the  said  Maria  Monk's 
stay  therein  ;  and  that  her  acquaintance  with  the  said  Maria  com- 
mei^ced  and  ended  at  th^  said  Asylum. 


105 


And  deponent  further  declared,  that  she  had  never  been,  at 
any  time  heretofore,  an  inmate  of  any  convent  whatever. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  the  conduct  of  the  said 
Maria  in  the  said  Asylum,  was  extremely  indecorous,  and  that 
her  example  was  hurtful  to  the  discipline  of  the  institution ;  and 
further,  that  deponent  always  understood  and  believed,  that  the 
said  Maria  had  le'.  previously  to  her  entrance  into  the  said  Asy- 
lum, the  life  of  a  st.  oiler  and  prostitute. 

And  deponent  further  declared,  that  during  the  stay  of  the  said 
i\Iaria  at  the  Asylum,  the  said  3Iaria  did  never  pretend  to  depo< 
ncnt,  or  to  any  other  person,  according  to  the  information  and  be- 
lief of  deponent,  that  she  had  been  at  any  time  an  inmate  of  aeon- 
vent  ;  and  further  deponent  declared  not. 

JANE  RAY. 

Sworn  before  me,  this  27th  day  of 
July,  1836. 

ADAM  L.  MACNIDER,  J.  P. 

Poor,  repentant,  and,  from  Mrs.  McDonell's  ac- 
count, sincerely  reformed  Jane  Ray,  has  never  been 
a  nun,  and  has  never  seen  one  except  in  the  streets. 
The  tricks  and  practices  attributed  to  her  in  the 
"  Disclosures,"  are  foreign  to  her  present  state,  and 
are  certainly  not  indulged  in  by  her  in  the  "dor- 
mitories," "  passages,"  or  "  cellars"  of  the  only  re- 
treat  from  the  world  she  has  ever  known — the 
"  Magdalen  Asylum." 

The  deponent  in  the  following  affidavit  is  "  one 
of  my  cousins"  mentioned  at  page  48  of  the 
♦*  Disclosures." 


No.  17.     Evidence  of  M,  Reed. 

District  of  Montreal,  Province  of  Lower  Canada: 

Margaret  Reed,  of  the  parish  of  the  Saut  au  Recollect,  in 
the  said  district,  being  duly  sworn  on  the  Holy  Evangelists,  de- 
poseth  and  saith,  that  the  contents  of  the  pamphlet  entitled  "Aw- 
ful Disclosures  of  Maria  Monk,"  have  been  communicated  to  her; 
that  she  hal'i  reason  to  believe,  and  doth  believe,  the  said  Maria 
Monk  to  be  identical  with  a  person  bearing  that  name,  who  was 
an  inmate  of  the  institution  commonly  known  as  the  Magdalen 
Asylum  of  the  city  of  Montreal,  from  the  month  of  November 
eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-four,  to  the  month  of  March  cigh- 


^sm 


106 


1 


teen  hundred  and  thirty-five  ;  and  that  she  hath  reason  to  be- 
Heve,  and  doth  believe,  the  person  designated  in  the  said  "Dis- 
closures" as  "one  of  my  cousins  who  lived  at  Lachine,  nam- 
ed Reed,"  to  be  identical  with  deponent. 

And  deponent  further  saith,  that  she  was  an  inmate  of  the  said 
Asylum  during  the  entire  period  of  the  residence  of  the  said  Ma- 
ria tlieroat. 

And  deponent  further  saith,  that  proviously  to  meeting  the  said 
Maria  at  the  said  Asylum,  she  had  formed  a  personal  acquaint- 
ance with  her  at  St.  Denis ;  that  deponent  particularly  knew  of 
the  residence  of  the  said  3Iaria  in  the  family  of  Charles  St.  Get- 
main,  batter,  of  the  said  St.  j)enis;  and  that  it  is  the  information 
and  behcf  of  the  deponent,  that  she  was  expelled  from  the  said 
family  on  account  other  dissolute  practices. 

And  deponent  further  saith,  that  deponent  hath  never  been  at 
any  time  heretofore  an  inmate  in  any  convent  whatever. 

And  deponent  further  saith,  that  the  said  Maria  hath  never  pre- 
tended to  deponent,  at  any  time,  or  to  any  other  person  or  persons, 
according  to  the  information  and  belief  of  deponent,  that  she  had 
been  at  any  time  an  inmate  of  a  convent;  but  tliat  deponent  al- 
Avays  understood,  as  well  from  the  confessions  of  the  said  Maria  as 
from  other  sources,  that  the  said  Maria  had  for  several  years  led 
the  life  of  a  common  stroller  and  prostitute  \  and  further  deponent 
mtii  not. 


Sworn  before  mc,  at  3Iontrcal,  this 
30th  of  July,  1836. 


her 

MARGARET  H-REED. 

mark. 


P.  LUKIN,  J.  P. 


Miss  jouise  Bousquet,  Miss  Hypolitc  Fournier 
and  her  sister,  Mary  Ann  Howard,  Jane  McCoy, 
Jane  Ray,  and  M.  Reed,  all  separately  and  con- 
clusively deny  all  knowledge  of  the  pretended  no- 
viciate  and  nunship  of  Monk.  They  all  deny  the 
allegations  concerning  them,  with  the  exception 
that  they  were  acquainted  with  Maria  Monk. 

Independently  of  "  nuns,  and  priests,"  there  are 
altogether  eight  persons  named  in  the  "  Disclosures" 
as  witnesses  to  Monk's  residence  in  the  Hotel 
Dieu  hospital  md  convent.  Doctor  Nelson  is  the 
eighth. 


107 


)n  to  be- 
iid"Dis. 
ne,  nam- 

f  the  fnid 
said  Ma- 

;  the  snid 
ncquftint- 

knew  of 
I  St.  Ger- 
'orraation 

the  said 

:  been  at 

ever  pro- 
•  persons, 
t  she  had 
onent  al- 
Maria  as 
years  led 
deponent 

[lEED. 


>(,  J.  P. 

Durnier 
IcCoy, 
con- 
ied  no- 
ny  the 
r.eption 

3re  are 
>sures" 
Hotel 
1  is  the 


No.  18.     Evidence  of  Doctor  Nelson, 

Montreal,  19t?i  Mardi,  1836. 

Sir — In  reply  to  your  request,  desiring  me  to  read  the  "  Dis- 
closures" of  Aliss  M.  jMonk,  and  to  say  whether  I  can  corrobo- 
rate any  of  llie  allegations  therein  contained,  jiarticularly  that  one 
which  relates  to  "  Dr.  Nelson,"  permit  me  to  say,  that  when  I 
was  ihe  medical  attendant  of  ihe  Hotel  Oieu  hospital,  and  occa- 
sionally of  the  convent,  which  is  the  doistorcil  part  of  the  esta- 
blishment, 1  never  once  taw  Mi.w  Monk  there;  but,  more  than 
unco,  at  lur  mother's  request,  1  saw  her  at  the  (Government 
House-keeuer's  apartments,  v\hi<^h  are  tlio.se  occupied  by  her 
mother.  I'he  description  she  gives  in  the  '*  Disclosures"  of  hav- 
ini^  accompanied  me,  during  my  attendance  on  tlie  sick,  is  there- 
fore incorrect,  and  it  is  otherwise  faulty  as  regards  tlie  recortl. 
On  the^e  occasions  the  physician  is  accompanied  by  one  of  the 
Apothccaresses,  a  nun,  for  the  purpose  of  rendering  to  him  an  ac- 
count of  the  administration  of  the  medit^ines  jireviously  ordered, 
to  give  such  information  as  nmy  be  asked  regiuding  the  patients 
dtuing  his  absence,  and  to  receive  his  future  dire<;tions ;  these 
lust,  and  his  prescriptions,  he  himself  writes  in  the  prescription- 
book  at  the  bed-^ide  :  they  are  in  the  I'Vench  Language,  and  all 
in  lay  own  hand-  writing  ;  therefore  the  assertion,  "  1  Irequently 
followed  Doctor  Nelson  with  pen,  ink,  and  paper,  and  v\  rote  down 
the  prescriptions,"  is  also  altogether  incorrect. 

I  am, 

Sir, 
Your  most  obedient  servant, 

(Signed)  "ROUT.  NELSON." 

Doctor  Nelson  knows  Monk  well,  for  he  has 
often  advised  her  on  her  maladv ;  btit  he  has  never 
known  her  as  a  nun  of  the  Hotel  Dieu. 

We  have  elsewhere  repeatedly  pointed  out  the 
gross  errors  of  the  "  Disclosures,"  in  regard  to  what 
is  publicly  known  of  the  Montreal  convent.  We 
have  said  that  Sister  Bourgeois  was  no  wise  con- 
nected in  the  foundation  of  the  liotel  Dieu,  and 
that  the  habit  of  Sister  Bourgeois  is  not  the  habit 
of  the  Hotel  Dieu  nuns.  This  is  no  secret  in  Ca- 
nada, as  will  appear  by  the  following  extract  from 
the  Quebec  Almanack  for  1831 : 


mm 


108 


i.:: 


No.  19.     Evidence  on  the  Foundation  of  the  Hotel 

Dieu, 

HOTEL  DIEU  OF  MONTREAL, 

Founded  in  the  year  1644, /or  the  Poor  Sick. 

Sister  Meniere,  Superior  since  1827. 

Professsed  Nuns, 36 

Novices,      -- 2 

Postulantes, 3 

-  41 

Quebec  Almanack,  1831. 

Sister  Bourgeois  founded  the  Congregational 
Nunnery,  and  it  is  there,  and  not  at  the  Hotel  Dieu, 
that  her  memory  is  held  in  peculiar  veneration. 
We  again  extract  from  the  Quebec  Almanack. 

No.  20,     Evidence  on  the  Foundation  of  the  Congre- 
gation  de  Notre  Dame, 

CONGREGATION  DE  NOTRE  DAME  A  MONTREAL. 

Sister  St.  Magdalen  (Miss  Huot)  Superior  since  1827. 
Professed  Nuns,  -        -        -        -        -        -        -        -81 

Novices,  - 2 

Postulantes,      - .'> 

•  S 

Quebec  Almanack^  1836. 

These  are  small  matters  in  themselves,  but  mate- 
rial when  considered  with  reference  to  the  identity 
of  the  informant  of  the  authors  of  the  "  Disclosures" 
with  an  ex-nun  of  the  Hotel  Dieu. 

At  page  34  of  the  **  Disclosures"  it  is  stated  that 
there  were  **  forty  novices"  at  the  Hotel  Dieu. 
Look  at  document  marked  No.  19  !  How  many 
novices  are  there  set  down  ?  Two.  The  truth  is, 
that  there  is  no  secrecy  observed  in  regard  to  the 
number  of  novices  or  of  nuns.     No  secrecy  could 


109 


;  Hotel 


-  36 
2 
3 

41 
:,  1831. 

ational 
;1  Dieu, 
;ration. 
ck. 

Jongre- 

REAL. 

-      81 
2 

88 
.  1836. 

mate- 
dentity 
>sures 


»> 


ed  that 
Dieu. 
many 

*uth  iS) 
to  the 
couUl 


I 


^ 


be  obsej'ved  consistently  with  the  laws  of  the  pro- 
vince ;  and  thus  it  happens  that  the  Protestant  edi- 
tors of  the  official  Almanack  are  perfectly  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  constituency  of  every  convent  in 
Lower  Canada.  Forty  novices  !  We  again  quote 
from  the  Quebec  Almanack,  but  for  1836. 

No.  21.     Evidence  07i  the  number  of  iiomces  at  the 

Hotel  Dieu, 

HOTEL  DIEU  OF  MONTREAL. 

Founded  by  Madame  de  Bouillon  in  1664, /or  the  poor  Sick. 

Sister  Lapailleur  Devoisy,  Superior  ..ince  1831 

Professed  Nuns, 94 

Novices, --.-1 

Postulantes 2 

y  i 

In  1831  there  were  two  novices,  and  in  1836  we 
find  one  ;  and  we  can  assert  with  great  certainty, 
that  at  no  time  since  the  foundation  of  the  hospi- 
tal there  have  been  forty,  or  any  number  approach- 
ing it. 

The  extracts  from  the  Quebec  Almanack  also 
corroborate  what  we  have  already  advanced,  that 
the  sisters  of  the  Congregational  Nunnery  take 
the  name  of  saints,  but  that  the  sisters  of  the  Hotel 
Dieu  never  do.  In  the  "  Disclosures,"  with  the  ex- 
ception of"  Jane  Ray,"  the  nuns  of  the  latter  are 
always  designa^^ed  as  "  saints." 

At  page  179  et  aliunde,  it  is  insinuated,  that  "su- 
periors," when  they  grow  old,  arc  regularly  mur- 
dered, and  the  bloody  exit  of  one  in  particular  is 
plainly  intimated.  In  the  extracts  from  the  alma- 
nack are  the  names  of  two  superiors.  The  sister 
Meziere,  mentioned  in  No.  19,  was  superior  from 

10 


mm 


1-^ 


111  ■    ■! 


h   'I 


no 


1827  to  1833.  The  sister  Lapailleur  Devolsy, 
mentioned  in  No.  21,  was  superior  from  1821  to 
1827,  and  was  re-elected  first  in  1833,  and  ag^in 
recently  in  June,  1836. 

At  page  33  it  is  asserted,  that  "  about  one  hun- 
dred priests  are  connected  with  the  seminary  of 
Montreal."  We  again  extract  from  the  official 
Almanack. 

,     No.  22.     Evidence  on  Montreal  Seminary, 

SEMINARY  OF  3I0NTREAL. 
Mr.  Henry  Roux,  Superior. 
Mr.  Joseph  Quiblier,  Vice  Superior. 
Mr.  James  Roeque. 

Mr.  Charles  de  Bellefeuille,  )  Missionaries  to  the  Lako  of  Two 
Mr.  Flavira  Durocher,  >         Mountains. 

Mr.  Anthelme  MalanJ. 
Mr.  Frs.  Humbert. 
Mr.  Jos.  L.  Melchior  Sai.vage. 
Mr.  Lasni  Hubert. 
Mr.  Ant.  Satin. 
Mr.  John  Bt.  Roupe. 
JVrr.  John  Richard. 
Mr.  Nicholas  Dufresne. 
Mr.  Joseph  Comte,  Procureur. 
Mr.  John  Bt.  St.  Pierre. 
Mr.  Francis  Bonin. 
Mr.  Patrick  Phelan. 

Mr.  Claudius  Fay,  faisant  les  fonctions  curiales. 
Mr.  John  Claudius  Leonard. 
Mr.  James  Arraud. 

LESSER  SEMINARY. 
Mr.  John  Bt.  Bayle,  Director. 
Mr.  John  Larkin,      i 
Mr.  Germ  Sery,       >  Professors. 

Mr.  Romain  Larre,  )  > 

Mr.  O'Reilly, 


Mr.  Angus  McDonell, 
Mr.  Frs.  X.  Deseve, 
Mr.  D.  Denis, 
Mr.  John  Bt.  Dupuis, 
Mr.  Plinquette, 
Mr.  Eu8.  Durocher, 


Regents  of 

the 
Humanities. 


Qutiftec  Almanack^  1831. 


i 


Ill 


Twenty  priests  attached  to  the  seminary  proper, 
and  nine  professors  and  r<?gents  to  the  lesser  semi- 
nary. The  latter  institution,  commonly  known  as 
the  college,  is  removed  half  a  mile  from  the  Mon- 
treal seminary. 

The  laws  of  Canada  fix  and  determine  the  age 
at  which  the  religious  habit  may  be  assumed. 

> 

No.  23.     Evidence  on  the  age  requisite  for  the  Mo- 

nastical  Profession* 

"  The  tenth  article  of  the  Ordinance  of  Orleans  had  fixed  the 
age  at  twenty-five  years  for  males,  and  at  twenty  for  females  ; 
but  the  Council  of  Trent  having  fixed  the  age  for  both  sexes  at 
sixteen  years,  the  twenty-eighth  article  of  the  ordinance  of  Blois 
adopted  the  same  rule,  and  it  was  followed  throughout  the  king- 
dom until  the  month  of  March,  1768.  (Article  on  the  Monastic  pro- 
fession.   Repertoire  de  Jurisprudence.) 

The  requisite  age  is  sixteen,  but  it  rarely  hap- 
pens that  the  veil  is  taken  before  twenty.  In  the 
"  Disclosures,"  mention  is  made  of  professed  nuns 
fourteen  years  old.  It  is  not  stated  at  what  age 
Monk  took  the  veil. 

'  No  distinction  is  made  in  the  "  Disclosures"  be- 
teen  novices  and  postulantes  ;  it  is  even  asserted, 
page  34,  that  novices  "  are  called  in  French  postu- 
lantes." Both  are  errors,  one  of  the  omission  and 
one  of  the  commission.  See  the  extracts  from  the 
official  Almanack  marked  Nos.  19,  20,  and  21. 

The  laws  of  Canada  interfere  in  the  ceremony 
of  vesting  the  religious  habit. 

No.  24.     Evidence  on  the  Vesting  of  the  Religious 

habit, 

"  In  all  religious  houses  there  shall  be  two  registers,  in  order  to 
inscribe  therein  the  deeds  of  vesting,  noviciate,  and  profession ; 


112 


which  regiistry  shall  be  paged,  and  each  page  noted  by  the  su- 

Eerior  of  the  convent,  to  do  which  superiors  shall  be  authorized 
y  a  capitulary  act,  to  be  inserted  at  the  commencement  uf  the 
said  registers." 

"  All  the  deeds  of  vesting,  noviciate  and  profession,  shall  be  in- 
scribed in  the  said  regifeters  in  continuation,  and  without  blanks, 
and  the  said  deeds  shall  be  signed  in  the  said  registers  by  the  re- 
quisite persons,  and  at  the  time  they  are  made,  and  in  no  case 
shall  the  said  deeds  be  inscribed  on  loose  leaves." 

"In  eacl.of  the  said  deeds  shall  be  mentioned  the  name  and 
simame,  and  the  aee  of  him  or  her  who  shall  assume  the  religious 
habit,  or  who  shall  make  profession ;  the  names,  qualitie«,  and 
domicils  of  his  or  her  father  and  mother ;  his  or  her  birth-place, 
and  the  date  of  the  deed,  which  shall  be  signed  on  the  registers, 
as  well  by  the  superior  as  by  him  or  her  who  shall  assume  the 
habit,  or  make  profession,  and  also  by  the  bishop  or  ecclesiastic 
who  shall  have  performed  the  ceremony,  and  by  two  of  the  near- 
est relations  or  guardians  who  shall  have  assisted  at  it. 

The  said  registers  shall  serve  during  five  consecutive  years, 
and  shall  be  lodged  at  the  Greffe.''  . 

(Super.)  ' 

In  the  "  Disclosures,"  the  public  ceremony  of 
vesting  the  individiial,  Monk,  is  described,  but  no 
mention  is  made  of  compliance  with  the  requisi^ 
tions  of  the  law. 

What  remains  ? 


t 


. 


CHAPTER  IX 


Documentary  evidence,  proving  that  the  plan  ^ven  in  the  "  Awful 
Disclosures ,^^  of  the  interior  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  is  in  aU  respects 
different  from  the  reality. 

We  will  not  do  the  American  public  the  injury 
of  supposing  that  their  eyes  cannot  be  opened 
to  truth.  We  are  well  aware  that  the  mere  circu- 
lation of  such  a  book  as  the  "  Disclosures,"  must 
have  created  a  description  of  public  opinion  preju- 
dicial to  the  good  nftme  of  the  individuals  and  in- 
stitutions who  stand  charged  therein.     We  under- 


1 


by  the  su- 
Eiuthorized 
ent  uf  the 

hall  be  in- 
ut  blanks, 
by  the  re- 
in no  case 

name  and 
e  religious 
ilitie«,  and 
irth-place, 
!  registers, 
ssume  the 
cclesiastic 
f  the  near- 

ive  years, 


lony  of 
,  but  no 
requisi^i 


e"  Awful 
U  respects 


injury 
opened 

circu- 
"  must 

preju- 
md  in- 
under- 


113 


stand  that  recently,  persons  from  the  United  States 
have  visited  Montreal,  on  missions  of  inquiry  into 
the  truth  of  these  charges.  It  is  probable  that  per- 
sons who  have  taken  so  much  trouble  to  verify  absurd 
conclusions  will  for  ever  retain  them.  Circum- 
stances do  not  help  to  correct  or  alter  the  organi- 
zation of  a  fool's  mind.  This  refutation  is  not  ad- 
dressed to  such  men  ;  still  less  is  it  addressed  to  men 
who,  with  sufficient  ability  to  distinguish  between 
truth  and  falsehood,  have  voluntarily,  and  for  sinis- 
ter purposes,  embraced  the  cause  of  the  latter.  It 
is  addressed  to  that  great  majority  who  know  only 
of  the  contents  of  the  pamphlet  through  the  medi- 
um of  conversation ;  and  who,  unacquainted  with  the 
enormous  inconsistencies  of  the  narrative,  have 
suffered  themselves  to  be  affected  by  general  asser- 
tions of  the  nature  of  its  contents. 

Now  we  desire  it  to  be  generally  known,  that  all 
the  allegations  of  Monk  and  her  supporters  are  dis- 
tinctly  met  and  refuted  in  this  reply. 

We  have  accepted  the  challenge  of  the  "  anti- 
papists"  in  the  matter  of  the  plan  and  composi- 
tion of  the  cloisters  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  ;  not  certainly 
as  an  absolute  test  of  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  the 
narrative  ;  for  it  is  the  prerogative,  not  of  Calvinis- 
tic  divines,  but  of  Reason,  to  fix  and  determine  such 
a  test.  We  have,  however,  accepted  the  challenge 
as  one  test,  and  we  proceed  to  lay  before  the  pub- 
lic the  result  of  the  encounter. 

The  narrative  of  Monk,  it  will  be  recollected, 
contains  a  detailed  description  of  what  is  termed 
the  "  interior  of  the  Black  Nunnery,"  and  it  is  stat- 
ed at  page  74,  that  whenever  that  interior  "shall 
be  examined,  and  found  to  be  materially  different" 


10* 


114 


from  the  description,  that  then  she,  Maria  Monk, 
***can  claim  no  confidence  of  her  readers." 

On  the  15th  of  July,  1836,  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nun- 
nery was  visited  by  five  gentlemen,  of  whom  three 
are  clergymen,  and  two  are  laymen — two  are  Ame- 
ricans, two  Canadians,  and  one  a  ►Scotchman ; 
four  are  Protestants,  and  one  is  a  Catholic.  It 
would  be  impossible  to  imagine  any  thing  more 
conclusive  than  their  evidence. 

No.  25.  Evidence  of  the  Rev,  W,  Curry,  Rev,  G, 
W,  Perkins,  Rev,  H,  Esson,  Benjamin  Holmes, 
Esq.  Justice  of  the  Peace,  and  Mr,  I,  Jones, 

Tliis  may  certify,  that,  being  desirous  of  ascertaining  the  truth 
in  regard  to  Maria  Monk's  printed  plan  and  description  of  the  Ho- 
tel Dieu,  or  Black  Nunnery  of  this  city,  1  did,  a  few  weeks  since, 
in  company  with  N.  B.  Doucet  and  1.  P.  Lacroix,  Esquires,  and 
tvithout  sending  any  previous  notice,  visit  said  Nunnery,  and 
with  said  map  and  description  in  hand,  examine  most  muiutely 
from  the  cellar  to  the  roof,  all  that  part  of  ^aid  building  between 
the  wall  or  St.  Joseph  street,  and  the  wall  running  from  the  north 
side  of  the  public  chapel,  (the  top  of  tJie  map  being  called  north,) 
that  fronts  on  St.  Paul  street  to  the  extreme  corner,  from  whence 
the  passage  to  the  Congregational  Nunnery  is  laid  down  in  said 
map  ;  and  I  do  most  freely  declare,  that  after  a  patient  and  pro- 
tracted scrutiny  of  the  walls,  windows,  closets,  doors,  cellars, 
rooms,  and  furniture  of  the  same;  after  having  examined  Avith 
equal  scrutiny  all  the  hospitals,  out-honses,  gardens,  vaults,  &c. 
&c.,  with  special  reference  not  only  to  their  appearance,  but  their 
relative  j.osition  to  each  other,  so  as  to  be  sure  that  nothing  was 
overlooked;  I  was  unable  to  discern  ahy  resemblance  whatever 
between  isaid  building,  in  whole  or  part,  and  that  portion  of  said 
map  furnished  by  Maria  Monk.  The  only  resemblance  being  that 
between  the  outside  walls,  and  the  grounrl  plan  in  said  map,  whicli, 
she  says,  was  furnished  by  another  hand.  All  the  interior  is  un- 
like her  plan  hi  every  respect;  and  in  as  much  as  most,  if  not  all, 
of  the  partition  walls  are  commenced  in  the  cellar,  and  built  of 
heavy  stone,  it  is  impossible,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  the 
building  should  have  been  so  altered  as  to  make  this  discrepancy  • 
for,  to  say  nothing  of  the  labor  and  expense  and  publicity  of  sach 
a  work,  the  walls  and  wood-work  bear  that  appearance  of  age 
which  cannot  be  counterfeited.  When  the  nuns  and  the  lady 
superior,  to  whom  I  was  introduced,  learnt  the  object  of  my  visit, 


115 


Monk, 

lu  Nun. 
m  three 
re  Ame- 
jhman  ; 
lie.  It 
5  more 


lev.  G, 
^otmes, 

5. 

the  fruth 

f  the  Ho- 

;ks  since, 

ires,  and 

lery,  and 

mhiuteiy 

between 

he  north 

J  north,) 

whence 

n  in  (iRk\ 

find  pro- 

eellars, 

ed  with 

ihf,  &c. 

)ut  their 

ing  was 

hatever 

of  said 

ing  that 

,  w  liicli, 

or  is  un- 

not  all, 

built  of 

that  the 

ipancy  • 

of  such 

of  age 

he  lady 

ly  visit, 


they  cheerfully  opened  every  enclosure  of  every  description ; 
answered  all  inmiiries  promptly ;  and  one  of  them  assured  me, 
that  if  they  had  had  timely  notice  of  my  visit,  a  permit  from  the 
Bishop  would  have  been  obtained  to  give  me  immediate  access 
to  tlie  whole  of  the  cloistered  department ;  and  I  was  assured  that 
as  soon  as  he  should  return  to  tiie  city,  such  permit  should  bo 
had. 

I  furthermore  certify,  that  having  been  informed  that  a  permit 
having  been  obtained  for  a  party  to  visit  and  examine  said  Hotel 
Dieu  nunnery,  and  that  I  was  requested  to  make  one  of  the  num- 
ber ;  I  did,  on  the  15th  July,  1836,  after  the  Rev.  G.  W.  Perkins 
had  been  added  to  the  number,  go  in  company  with  said  party, 
consisting  of  Rev.  G.  W.  Perkins  of  the  American  Pres.  church, 
Rev.  H.  Esson  of  tlie  Scotch  pres.  church,  Benj.  Holmes,  Esqr. 
cashier  of  the  Montreal  Bank,  Protestants,  and  J.  Jones,  publisher 
of  L'Amidu  Peuple,  Roman  Catholic,  and  commencing  at  the  gen- 
eral hospital  and  chapel,  1  examined,  in  company  with  these  gen- 
tlemen, all  the  remainder  of  the  buildings  and  grounds  of  said 
Hotel  Dieu  and  Nunnery,  until  we  had  repeatedly  traversed  ev- 
ery section  of  the  same.  We  examined  closely  the  walls,  win- 
dows, doors,  rooms,  vaults,  &;c.  <fec.,  and  compared  the  same  witli 
Maria  Monk's  printed  plan  and  description  of  what  she  denomi- 
nated the  Black  Nunnery :  and  I  freely  declare,  that  after  the 
closest  search,  during  which  the  lady  superior  and  several  nuns 
stood  ready  to  lead  in  every  direction  and  give  every  assistance, 
we  were  unable  to  discover  the  remotest  resemblance  between 
any  part  of  said  bniUling  and  the  plan  or  description  of  Maria 
Monk.  I  furthermore  aasert,  that  I  do  not  beUeve  it  possible  that 
any  persons  could  ha\  e  made  these  alterations  in  the  budding, 
fliat  would  have  pioHuced  this  discrepancy,  without  having  torn 
down  and  re-built  the  nunnery  from  the  roof  to  the  ground. 
We  examined  the  burial-place,  and  the  register  of  deaths,  com- 
mencing with  the  foundation  of  tlie  convent.  We  examined,  also, 
the  register  in  which  are  entered  the  names,  ages,  and  dates  of 
the  taking  the  veil  of  each  nnu.  To  ascertain  whether  this  wa.«! 
the  real  register,  1  called  for  the  name  of  a  nun  with  whom  I  had 
become  acquainted  about  one  year  since,  and  was  immediately 
referred  to  it.  In  this  record,  which  was  an  old  book,  there  were 
no  erasures,  no  mutilations.  We  searched  for  the  name  of  Maria 
Monk,  and  others  mentioned  in  her  book  ;  no  such  names  were 
there.  In  conclusion,  1  declare  to  all  whom  it  may  concern,  that 
if  Maria  Monk  has  told  the  truth  in  her  description  of  the  interior 
of  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunu#y  of  x>Iontreal,  I  shall  not  be  slow  to  be- 
lieve that  the  nunsi  of  Canada  yet  retain  the  power  of  working 
miracles  witl;  stone  and  mortar;  and  that  Maria  Mank  possessed 
this  accomphshrnent  up  to  the  moment  of  her  arrival  in  St.  Jean 
Baptiste  street,  at  the  time  of  her  escape.  For,  when  she  "  step- 
pea  across  the  yard,  unbarred  the  great  gate,  and  was  at  liberty," 
she  must  have  passed  directly  over,  luider,  or  through,  at  least 


116 


three  high  stone  walls  that  would  have  discouraged  a  less  adven- 
turous lady. 

(Signed)        W.  F.  CURRY,  Cor.  Sec.  of  the  Canada 
Education  und  Home  Miss.  Society. 
Montreal,  July  18, 1836. 

Having  vif^^itod  the  nunnery  in  company  with  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Curry  and  other  Proloi^taiit  gentlemen,  as  stated  in  the  preced- 
ing declaration,  I  do  most  fully  agree  to  the  statements  therein 
contained.  In  every  step  of  rnv  progress  through  the  building, 
1  had  the  Inst  edition  of  Mariti  clonk's  work  in  my  hand,  and  did 
not  fail  most  carefully  to  compare  it  with  the  interior  of  the  edi- 
fice. 1  hesitate  not  to  say,  that  it  was  utterly  impossible  that  a 
person  at  all  acciuainted  with  the  internal  plan  of  the  nunnery 
could  have  drawn  up  the  sketch  or  map  given  in  her  book  ;  so 
thorough  was  our  scrutiny,  that  no  changes,  if  materially  varying 
the  interior,  could  have  escaped  our  notice. 

.Montreal,  July,  22,  1336.  (Signed)    G.  W.  PERKINS, 

-   Pastor  of  the  Am.  Pres.  Ch. 

I  hereby  certify,  that,  as  stated  in  the  above  declarations,  I  ac- 
companied the  Rev.  Messrs.  t'urry  and  Perkins,  Benjamin 
Holmes,  Esquire,  cashier  of  the  Montreal  bonk,  and  J.  Jones, 
publisher  of  the  L'Ami  du  Pcuple  newspaper  of  this  city,  on  Fri- 
day, the  ir»th  instant,  throughout  the  course  of  a  very  minute  and 
rigorous  scrutiny  of  the  whole  extensive  range  of  buildings  form- 
ing the  Hotel  Dieu  or  Blaoic  IVuimery  of  this  city,  having  been 
conducted  through  all  the  numerous  divisions  of  the  establish- 
ment, and  having  deliberately  and  carefully  surveyed  them  in 
succession,  comparing,  at  every  stage  of  our  progress,  what  we 
saw  with  the  preteucled  plan  of  the  said  nunnery  as  exhibited  hi 
the  lairt  edition  of  3Iaria  Monk's  work ;  and  I  perfectly  concur 
with  the  two  reverend  gentlemen  above  mentioned,  in  declaring 
my  decided  conviction  that  tlie  said  plan  ascribed  to  Maria  Monk 
is  a  palpable  and  complete  fabrication,  derionstrative  of  nothing 
but  its  author's  total  ignorance  of  said  building. 

(Signed)  H.  ESSON, 

member  of  the  Scotch  Presbyterian  Church, 
St.  Gabriel  street,  Montreal. 

Montreal,  July  23d,  1836. 

I  hereby  certify,  that  on  the  16th  day  of  Jidy  instant,  I  accom- 
panied to  the  Hotel  Dieu,  or  Black  Nuiviery,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Curry, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Perkins,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Essun,  and  Mr.  Jenes,  and 
was  ♦hen  and  there  present  at  the  examination  made  and  entered 
upon  by  those  gentlemen,  as  stated  in  the  foregoing  certificates, 
the  full  tenor  ol  which,  their  close  investigation  of  the  premises, 
and  their  comparing  the  same  with  Maria  Monk's  plan  of  the 
said  buildings,  1  was  witness  to  ;  and  I  have  much  pleasure  in 


688  adven- 

Canada 
Society. 


Rev.  Mr. 

le  preced- 
tB  therein 
3  building:, 
d,  Jind  did 
)f  the  edi- 
ble that  a 
nunnery- 
book  ;  so 
ly  varying 

IKINS, 
Pros.  Ch. 

ions,  I  ac- 
Benjamin 
J.  Jones, 
;y,  on  Fri- 
linute  and 
ngs  form- 
ing been 
efitablish- 
1  them  in 
what  we 
hibitcd  in 
y  concur 
declaring 
ria  Monk 
nothing 

SSON, 
Church, 
real. 


I  accom- 
r.  Curry, 
mes,  and 
1  entered 
tificates, 
)remises, 
n  of  the 
iBasure  in 


117 


bearing  testimony  to  the  cheerful  and  ready  disposition  of  tho 
lady  superior,  and  the  other  ladies,  in  forwarding  the  inspection, 
arid  affording  every  information  acquired  by  the  two  first-named 
Rev.  gentlemen. 

(Signed)  BENJ.  HOLMES,  J.  P. 

Montreal,  23d  July,  1836, 

I  hereby  certify,  that  I  visited  the  Hotel  Dieu  convent  in  com- 
pany with  the  gentlemen  whof^e  names  arc  hereinbefore  affixed 
to  their  separate  certificates.  I  declare  that  I  entirely  concur  in 
the  statements  and  conclusions  they  mak? ;  and  I  further  declare, 
that  the  "  veiled  nuns'  department,"  which,  to  all  appearance,  by 
the  plan  is  located  in  the  centre  building  of  the  convent,  is  in 
fact  situate  elsewhere. 

J.  JONES. 
Montreal,  July  23d,  183G. 

At  the  time  of  their  visit,  the  preceding  gentle- 
men used  Hoisington  and  Trow's  edition  of  the 
"  Disclosures,"  which  is  provided  with  jin  engraved 
plan  of  the  Hotel  Dieu,  of  the  nunnery  grounds, 
and  of  "tlie  veiled  nuns'  department."  Nothing 
was  omitted  to  give  to  the  proceedings  of  the  visi- 
tors the  character  and  reality  of  sincere  and  con- 
scientious investigation  ;  and  what  has  been  the  re- 
sult ?  Read  the  certificates. 

It  would  seem  impossible  for  the  advisers  of 
Monk  to  construct  a  lie  of  ordinary  verisimilitude. 
The  engraved  plan  prefixed  to  their  improved  edi- 
tion of  the  "  Disclosures,"  is  a  manifest  and  impu- 
dent fabrication. 

No.  26.     Evidence  of  J,  Ostell,  Esq.  Architect, 

This  is  to  certify,  that  the  plan  of  the  Hotel  Dieu  nunnery  of 
Montreal,  pubhshed  in  a  book,  entitled  "  Awful  Disclosures  of 
Maria  Monk,"  having  been  submitted  to  me  for  my  professional 
inspection,  I  have  considered  the  said  plan,  and  declare  it  to  be 
my  opinion,  that,  architecturally  speaking,  and  with  reference  to 
the  practice  prevailing  in  Canada  in  the  construction  of  build- 
ings, it  is  impossible  that  the  said  plan  should  have  any  real  ex- 
istence, for  the  following  reasons.    The  detailed  plan  presents 


118 


partiiion  wulls  on  the  first  and  second  stories,  which  have  no  corre- 
Kpondence  with  each  other,  commencing  and  ending  on  each  se- 
parate story ;  whereas  it  is  necessary  that  such  walls  should  not 
only  corref^pond  with  each  other,  but  that  they  should  commence 
in  the  cellar ;  also  the  second  story  plan  shows  a  portion  of  building 
at  one  extremity,  without  any  similar  substructure  in  the  lower 
stories;  the  lorm  of  the  main  buildinsr  on  the  block  plan  exhibits 
considerable  incongruity  with  that  ot'the  detailed  plan,  inasmuch 
as  the  two  small  wings  forming  the  cross  of  the  building  bear  a 
proportion  on  tho  one  that  is  entirely  lost  sight  of  in  the  other. 
Further  I  hereby  declare,  after  having  made  during  the  last  month 
a  careful  inspection  of  a  greater  portion  of  the  buildings  of  the  Ho- 
tel Dieu  nunnery,  more  particnlarlv  of  the  centre  or  main  building, 
wl\ich  is  represented  in  the  "  Disclosures"  as  containing  the  veil- 
ed mms'  apartments,  that  the  plans  and  descriptions  there  given 
are  essentially  false,  and  could  not,  in  my  opinion,  havo  ever  had 
any  actual  existenoe  in  connection  with  the  above-named  build- 
ing ;  and  further,  that  the  nuns'  apartments  or  cloisters  (to  which 
I  was  no'  permitted  to  enter)  are  not  situate  in  the  centre  build- 
ing, but  in  that  part  of  the  structure  extending  towards  St.  Jean 
Baptiste  street  in  the  east  wing  on  the  said  street. 

(Signed)  JOHN  OSTELL, 

Montreal,  July  30th,  1836.  Architect  and  Surveyor. 


CHAPTER  X. 

Documents  produced  by  the  advisers  of  Monk  in  support  of  the  truth 

of  her  Narrative. 


In  the  month  of  March  of  the  present  year,  the 
*<  Protestant  Vindicator,"  a  paper  printed  in  the 
city  of  New -York,  published  one  affidavit,  one  state- 
ment of  an  anonymous  "  female,"  and  one  certifi- 
cate, favorable  to  the  veracity  of  Maria  Monk. 
That  the  "  Awful  Disclosures"  may  not  be  depriv- 
ed of  the  benefit  of  them,  the  compositors  have  kind- 
ly consented  to  "  set  them  up"  and  the  pressmen 
to  "  wprk  them  off," 


lid 


e  no  corre- 
)n  each  se- 
should  not 
commence 
of  building 
the  lower 
an  exhibits 
,  inasmuch 
ling  bear  a 
I  the  other, 
last  month 
i  of  the  Ho- 
in  building, 
ig  the  veu- 
tiere  given 
0  ever  had 
med  build- 
j  (to  which 
sntre  build- 
Is  Hi.  Jean 

STELL, 

Surveyor. 


>f  the  truth 


ear,  the 
in  the 
e  state- 
certifi- 
Monk. 
dcpriv- 
'^e  kind- 
essmen 


No.  27.     Affidavit  of  William  Miller. 

'•  City  and  County  of  Neu)-  York,  ss. 

"  William  Miller  bring  duly  sworn,  doth  say, — T  knew 
Maria  Monk  when  she  was  a  child,  and  was  acquainted  with  all 
her  father's  family.  My  lather,  Mr.  Adam  Miller,  kept  the  go- 
vernment school  at  St.  John's,  Djwer  Canada,  for  some  years, 
(^aptain  Wm.  Monk,  Maria's  falhrr,  lived  in  thn  garrison,  a  short 
distance  from  the  village,  and  she  attended  the  school  with  mo 
for  some  months,  probably  as  much  as  a  year,  kler  four  bro- 
thers also  attended  with  us.  Our  families  woio  on  terms  of  inti- 
macy, as  my  father  had  a  ]\u!}\  regard  for  Captain  JMonk  ;  but 
the  temper  of  his  wife  wa.s  sm-h,  even  at  that  time,  iis  to  cause 
much  trouble.  Capt.  3Ionk  died  verv  suddenly,  as  was  reported, 
in  consequence  of  lieing  poisoned.  Mrs.  Monk  was  then  Keeper 
of  the  Government  House  in  Montreal,  and  received  a  pensiou, 
which  privilege  she  has  since  enjoyed.  In  the  summer  of  1832 
I  left  Canada,  and  came  to  this  city.  In  about  a  year  afterward  I 
visited  Montreal,  and  on  the  day  when  the  Governor  reviewed 
the  troops,  I  believe  about  the  end  of  August,  I  called  at  the  Go- 
vernment House,  where  I  saw  Mrs.  Monk  and  several  of  tlie  fa- 
mily. I  inquired  where  Maria  was,  and  she  told  me  that  she 
was  in  the  nunnery.  This  fact  I  well  remember,  because  the  in- 
formation gave  me  great  pain,  as  I  had  unfavorable  opinions  of 
the  numieries.  On  reading  the  "  Awful  Disclosurcn,"  I  at  once 
knew  she  was  the  eloped  nun,  but  was  unable  to  find  her  until 
a  few  days  since,  w  hen  we  recognLsed  each  other  immediately 
I  give  with  pleasure  my  testimony  in  her  favor,  as  she  is  among 
strangers,  and  exertions  have  been  made  against  her.  I  declare 
my  personal  knowledge  of  many  facts  stated  in  her  book,  and 
ray  full  belief  in  the  truth  of  her  story,  wiiich,  shocking  as  it  is, 
cannot  appear  incredible  to  those  persons  acquainted  with  Ca- 
nada.   "  " 

Sworn  before  me,  this 
3d  day  of  March,  183G. 


"  WH.LIAM  MH.LER. 

"BENJAMIN  D.  K.  CRAIG, 
"  Commissioner  of  Deeds,  <fec.' 


We  recommend  William  Miller  to  repent.  Whe- 
ther Mrs.  Monk  really  did  tell  him  in  1833  that  her 
daughter  was  in  a  nunnery,  may  remain  for  ever 
a  personal  question  between  them ;  but  this  is  not 
the  case  with  regard  to  the  identity,  to  which  he 
has  sworn,  of  Mrs.  Monk's  late  husband,  and  Maria 
Monk's  late  father,  with  the  Captain  William  Monk 
mentioned  in  his  affidavit.     The  evidence  of  Mar- 


120 


tel  Paul  (No.  6),  and  of  Lawrence  Kidd,  E^q.  (No. 
8),  states  who  Monk's  father  really  was.  He  was 
not  a  "  gentleman  in  the  service,"  but  held  the 
post  of  Barrack-master  at  St.  John's. 

The  "  Vindicator^'*  premises  the  publication  of  the 
anonymous  statement,  by  insinuating  that  the 
name  of  the  author  is  withheld  "  only  from  delicacy 
to  a  lady's  feelings."  The  "delicacy"  of  the  au- 
thors and  circulators  of  f.he  **  Awful  Disclosures  !" 


No.  28.     Anonymous  Evidence, 

"  I  was  born  at  Montreal,  and  resided  there  until  within  a  few 
months,  and  where  my  friends  still  remain.  I  was  educated 
among  the  CathoUcs,  and  have  never  separated  myself  from 
them. 

"  I  knew  Maria  Monk  when  quite  a  child.  We  went  to  school 
together  for  about  a  year,  as  near  as  I  can  remember,  to  Mr.  Work- 
man, Sacrament-street,  in  Montreal.  She  is  about  one  month 
younger  than  myself.  We  left  that  school  at  the  same  time,  and 
entered  the  Congregational  Nunnery  nearly  together.  I  could 
mention  many  thmgs  which  I  witnessed  thece,  calculated  to  con- 
firm some  of  her  accounts. 

"  I  know  of  the  elopement  of  a  pi'iest  named  Leclere,  who  was 
a  confessor,  with  a  nun  sent  from  the  Congregational  Nunnery  to 
teach  in  a  village.  They  were  brought  back,  alter  which  she 
gave  birth  to  an  infant,  and  was  again  employed  as  a  teacher. 

"Children  ^vero  often  punished  in  the  (Congregational  Nun- 
nery by  being  made  to  stand  with  arms  extended,  to  imitate 
Christ's  posture  on  the  cross  \  and  when  wc  found  vermin  in  our 
soup,  as  was  often  the  c -.se,  we  wore  exhorted  to  overcome  our 
repugnance  to  it,  becau.se  Christ  died  for  us.  I  have  seen  such 
belts  as  are^mentioned  in  the  vAwful  Disclosures,'  as  well  as 
gags  ;  but  never  saw  them  applied. 

'*  Maria  Monk  left  the  Congregational  Nunnery  before  I  did, 
and  became  a  novice  in  the  Hotel  D'ien.  I  remember  her  en- 
trance into  the  latter  very  well,  for  we  had  a  ^jonr  de  conge,^  holi- 
day, on  that  occasion. 

"  Some  short  time  subsequently,  after  school-hours  one  after- 
noon, while  in  the  school-room  in  the  second  stcry  of  the  Con- 
gregational Nunnery,  several  of  the  girls  standing  near  a  window 
exclaimed, '  There  is  Maria  Monk.'  I  sprang  to  the  window  to 
look,  and  saw  her,  with  several  other  novices,  in  the  yard  of  the 
Hotel  Dieu,  among  the  plants  which  grew  there.  She  did  not 
appear  to  notice  us,  but  1  perfectly  recognized  her. 


121 


E«q.  (No. 

He  was 

held   the 

ion  of  the 
that  the 
I  delicacy 
f  the  au- 
osures !" 


"ithin  a  few- 
is  educated 
(lyself  from 


ntto  school 
•  Mr.  Work- 
one  month 
e  time,  and 
T,  I  could 
ited  to  con- 

e,  who  was 
Vunncry  to 
which  she 

teacher. 

onal  Nun- 

to  imitate 

min  in  our 

rcome  our 

seen  such 
Us  well  as 

'ore  I  did, 
3r  her  en- 
i/f^e,'  holi- 

one  after- 
the  Con- 
a  window 
indow  to 
ard  of  tlie 
e  did  not 


1*1  have  frequently  visited  the  puhHc  hospital  of  the  Hotel  Dieu. 
It  is  the  custom  there  for  some  of  the  nuns  and  novices  to  enter 
at  three  o'clock,  P.  M.,  in  procc  sion^  with  food  and  deUcacies  for 
the  sick.  I  recollect  some  of  my  visits  there  by  circumstances 
attending  them.  For  instance,  I  was  much  struck,  on  several  oc- 
casions, by  the  beauty  of  a  young  novice,  whose  slender,  grace- 
ful form,  and  interesting  appearance,  distinguished  her  from  the 
rest.  On  inquiry  I  learnt  that  her  name  was  Dubois,  or  some- 
thing like  it,  and  the  daughter  of  an  cM  man  who  had  removed 
from  the  country,  and  lived  near  the  Place  d' Armes.  She  was  so 
gcKerally  admired  for  her  beauty,  that  she  was  called  'la  belle 
St.  Francois' — St.  Francis  being  the  saint's  name  she  had  assum* 
ed  in  the  convent. 

"I  frequently  went  to  the  hospital  to  see  two  of  my  particular 
friends  who  were  novices :  and  subsequently  to  visit  one  who  had 
a  sore  throat,  and  was  sick  for  some  weeks.  I  saw  Maria  Monk 
there  many  times,  in  the  dress  of  a  novice,  employed  in  ditferent 
ways ;  but  we  were  never  allowed  to  speak  to  each  other. 

"  Towards  the  close  of  the  winter  of  1833-4,  I  visited  the  hospi- 
tal of  the  Hotel  Dieu  very  frequently,  to  see  Miss  Bourke,  a  friend 
of  mine,  although  I  was  not  permitted  to  speak  with  her.  While 
there  one  day,  at  the  hour  of '  conge,^  or '  collation,^  which,  as  I  be- 
fore stated,  was  at  three  P.  M.,  a  procession  of  nuns  and  novices 
entered,  and  nmong  the  former  I  saw  Maria  Monk,  with  a  black 
veil,  &c.  She  perceived  and  recognized  me ;  but  put  her  finger 
upon  her  lips  in  token  of  silence  ;  and  knowing  how  rigidly  the 
rules  were  enforced,  I  did  not  speak. 

"A  short  time  afterward  I  saw  her  again  in  the  same  place, 
and  under  similar  circumstances. 

"lean  fix  the  year  when  this  occurred,  because  I  recollect 
that  the  nuns  in  the  hospital  stared  at  a  red  dress  I  wore  that  sea- 
son ;  and  I  am  certain  about  the  time  of  year,  because  I  left  my 
galo-shoes  at  the  door  before  I  went  in. 

"The  improper  conduct  of  a  priest  was  the  cause  of  my  leaving 
the  Congregational  Nunnery :  for  my  brother  saw  him  kissing  a 
female  one  day  while  he  w  as  on  a  visit  to  nic,  and  exclaimed — '  O 
mon  Dieu  !  what  a  place  you  are  in  ! — If  fatl  or  does  not  take  you 
out  of  it,  I  will,  if  I  have  to  tear  you  away.' 

"  After  the  last  sight  I  had  of  Maria  Monk  in  the  hospital,  I  ne- 
ver saw  nor  heard  of  her  until  after  1  ho<l  been  for  some  time  an 
inhabitant  of  New-York.  I  then  saw  an  extract  from  'Awful  Dis- 
closures/ published  in  a  newspaper,  wiuen  I  was  perfectly  satisfied 
that  she  was  the  authoress,  and  again  at  liberty.  I  was  unable  for 
several  weeks  to  find  her  residence,  but  at  length  visited  the 
house  when  she  was  absent.  Seeing  an  infant  among  a  number 
of  persons  who  were  strangers  to  me,  as  those  present  will  testify, 
I  declared  that  it  must  be  the  child  mentioned  in  her  book,  from 
the  striking  resemblance  it  bears  to  Father  Phelan,  whom  1  well 
know.    This  declaration  has  also  been  muJe  by  othera. 

a 


1^2 


"When  Maria  Monk  entered,  she  passed  across  the  room,  with- 
out turning  towards  me ;  but  I  recognized  her  by  her  gait,  and 
when  she  saw  me  she  knew  me  at  onco.  1  have  since  spent  ma- 
ny hours  w^ith  her,  and  am  entirely  convinced  of  the  truth  of  her 
story,  especially  as  I  knew  many  things  before  which  tend  to  con- 
firm the  statements  which  she  makes." 

1  '".  '' 

"  It  is  superfluous,"  remarks  the  Vindicator,  "  to 
add  any  thing  to  the  above  testimony."  For  the 
comfort  of  the  "  lady,"  it  is  recommended  that  her 
future  silence  may  render  it  "  superfluous"  to  sift 
her  testimony  and  the  worth  of  it.     She  is  known. 

The  previous  certificate  of  "  We  the  Subscribers," 
is  a  novel  species  of  intellectual  evidence.  It  will 
be  seen  that  they  not  only  accept  the  testimony  of 
the  "  spontaneous  William  Miller"  (No.  27^  and  of 
the  **  young  married  woman"  (No.  26),  but  that 
they  also,  in  the  character  of  critics,  pronounce  on 
the  internal  testimony  in  favor  of  the  "  Disclosures." 
They  may  drink  the  cup  of  shame.     Poor  Crrs  ! 


CHAPTER  XI. 

Proceedings  of  the  aaaociates  in  Canada^  in  the  summer  of  1835, 

The  earliest  instigator  of  Monk's  fabrications 
appears  to  have  been  an  individual  namod  Hoyte. 
The  moral  character  of  this  individual  had  sutfered 
severely  a  short  time  previously  to  his  encounter 
with  Monk  in  New-York  about  the  month  of 
May. 

We  are  glad  to  perceive  by  the  following  testi- 
mony, tliat  although  he  may  be  a  preacher,  he  is 
not  a  regular  ordained  minister  of  any  Christian  de- 
nomination. 


123 


3om,  witli- 
'  gait,  and 
sp«nt  ma- 
uth  of  her 
jnd  to  con- 


tor,  "  to 
For  tlie 
that  her 

to  sift 
known. 
;ribers," 

It  will 
nony  of 
I  and  of 
)ut  that 


mce  on 
)sure8." 
^rrs  ! 


No.  29.     Evidence  of  the  Rev*  M.  Rickey, 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Morning  Courier. 

iSiR, — Among  the  aflidavits  published  in  your  paper  of  to-day, 
relating  to  Mr.  Hoyte  and  Maria  Monk,  I  observe  a  deposition  by 
Mr.  Goodenough,  tliat  when  Mr.  Hoyte,  in  the  month  of'  August 
last,  put  up  at  tlie  Exchange  Coffee-house,  he  was  entered  on  the 
book  as  a  Methodist  preacher^  and  Agent  or  Superinfendant  of  Sun- 
day Schools,  ^c.  It  has,  however,  been  asccitained,  from  an  ex- 
amination of  the  book  referred  to,  that  no  official  designation  is 
appended  in  it  to  Mr.  Iloyte's  name.  This  discrepancy,  Mr. 
(ioodcnough  states,  took  place  entirely  tlirough  mistake,  and  he 
did  not  know  that  Mr.  Hoyte  was  thus  characterized  in  his  affi- 
davit till  he  saw  it  in  print.  But  as  a  similar  mistake  has  found 
its  way  into  several  of  the  depositions  which  have  b»;en  elicited 
by  this  unhappy  affair,  I  deem  it  incumbent  upon  me,  as  a  regu- 
larly appointed  Methodist  minister  of  this  city,  to  declare  that 
Mr.  Hoyte  has  never  had  any  connexion  with  the  Methodist  so- 
ciety, either  as  a  preacher  or  as  an  agent  for  Sunday  Schools ; 
and  I  would  at  the  same  time  express  my  surprise  and  regret,  that 
the  Neio-York  Protestant  Vindicator  should  have  taken  up,undin- 
dustriou.sly  circulated  charges  of  so  grave  a  nature  against  the 
nriestu  and  nuns  of  this  city,  derived  from  so  polluted  a  source. 
From  such  a  species  of  vindication  no  cause  can  receive  either 
honor  or  credit.  By  giving  this  publicity,  you  will  confer  a  fa- 
vor on  your's  respectfully,  MATHEW  RICHEY, 

Wesley  an  Minister. 

Montreal,  Nov.  16,  1835. 


)/■  1835. 

cationsi 
Hoyte. 
utfered 
ounter 
lith    of 

testi- 

he  is 

lan  de- 


iYo.    30.     Correspondence  on  the  character  of  \y, 

K,  Hoyte, 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Morning  Courier. 

Sir —  A  respectable  citizen  of  this  city,  connected  with  the 
American  Presbyterian  Society,  informed  me,  a  few  days  since, 
that  Mr.  Hoyte,  who  has  figured  so  largely  in  the  papers  of  late, 
had  been  connected  with  some  charitable  Society  m  this  city,  to 
distribute  Piblcs  and  Tracts  in  the  Eastern  Townships;  but  that 
his  accounts  have  proved  so  unsatisfactory,  that  he  had  boen  re- 
moved from  the  situation.  Now,  why  do  not  thoso  persons,  who 
are  acquainted  with  3Ir.  Hoyte's  character,  come  forward  and 
expose  him  pubhcly  ?  A. 

Nov.  17. 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Morning  Courier. 

Sir, — Oberving  in  your  paper  of  yesterday,  a  commnnicntipn 
^cribin^  silence  to  certain  pertions  acquainted  with  the  character 


124 


of  Mr.  W.  K.  Hoyte,  who  has  lately  figured  so  largely  in  the  va- 
rious priMts  of  this  city,  and  asking  why  they  do  not  "publicly  ex- 
pose" that  individual? 

In  reply,  it  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  such  has  already  been  done 
where  alone  it  was  deemed  requisite,  {i.  e.  in  the  United  States,) 
as  will  Appear  by  reference  to  a  report  dated  in  April  last,  and 
which  appeared  in  the  New-York  Evangelist,  with  a  request  that 
it  would  "be  copied  into  the  Boston  Recorder  and  Vermont  Chro- 
nicle." Your  insertion  of  this  note,  will  oblige,  respectfully  youra, 

VERITAS. 

Montreal,  November  19,  1835. 

No.*  31.     Evidence  of  Committee  on  the  character 

ofW.K.  Hoyte. 

From  the  New-York  Evangelist  of  April  last. 

"Before  dismissing  the  subject,  the  committee  caniiot  but  ex- 
press their  deep  regret  that  Mr.  Hoyte  has  not  complied  witli 
their  wishes  as  to  the  management  and  disposal  of  the  booka 
committed  to  his  charge,  nor  to  their  repeated  solicitations  to 
keep  his  accounts  in  a  clear  and  accurate  manner.  Ills  conduct 
in  this  respect  being  any  thing  but  satisfactory,  they  wish  further 
to  intimate  to  tneir  friends  in  the  United  States,  that  the  gentle- 
man alluded  to  is  no  longer  their  agent,  or  in  any  way  acting 
under  their  responsibility.' 

"  THOMAS  M'LAREN, ) 

A.  F.  MARSHALL,         >  Committee." 

HENRY  LYMAN,  ) 


This  is  the  man  who  accompanied  Monk  to  Ca- 
nada in  August,  1835,  and  who  had  the  impudence 
to  offer  himself  to  the  notice  of  several  honorable 
men,  as  an  investigator  of  the  truth  of  certain  ru- 
mors concerning  the  priests  and  nuns,  of  which  he 
himself  was  the  Author !  Tlie  wretch  was  scorned 
as  he  deserved.  "  Judge  Turner"  of  Vermont,  who 
foolishly  countenanced  him  for  a  brief  period,  doubt- 
lessly in  consequence  of  having  discovered  his  co- 
habitation with  the  pretended  ex-nun,  withdrew 
froto  his  society. 


125 


in  the  va- 
iiblicly  ex- 
been  done 
;d  States,) 
I  last,  and 
quest  that 
nont  Chro- 
illy  youra, 

RITAS. 


haracter 


ot  but  ex- 
plied  vvitli 
the  buokij 
itations  to 
is  conduct 
sli  further 
le  gentle- 
ay  acting 


nittee. ' 

to  Ca- 
)udence 
norable 
ain  ru- 
lich  he 
corned 
it,  who 
doubt- 
his  CO- 
thdrew 


No.  32.     Evidence  of  Catharine  Couriers  and  Mary 

McCaffrey, 

District  of  Montrcnl,  Province  of  Lower  Canada : 

Before  me,  W.  Robertson,  one  of  his  3Iajesty'8  Justices  of 
the  Peace  for  the  District  of  Montreal,  apppared  Catharine  Con- 
nors of  Montreal ;  she  having  made  oath  on  the  Holy  Evange- 
lists, to  say  the  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  declared  and 
Miid  what  follows  : 

'J'owards  the  19th  of  August  last,  two  men  and  a  woman  came 
to  the  Exc/iun^e  Coffee-House ;  their  names  were  written  in  the 
book,  one  by  the  name  of  Judge  Turner,  and  the  other  as  Mr 
Hoyte  ;  the  name  of  the  woman  was  not  written  in  the  book  in 
which  the  names  of  travellers  are  written,  because  I  was  inform- 
ed that  they  were  taking  a  single  room  with  two  beds.  Some 
lime  after  another  room  was  given  to  them  for  their  accommo- 
dation; the  woman  passed  for  ilie  wife  of  3Ir.  Hoyte. 

Tiie  day  following,  when  I  was  malung  the  bed,  I  found  the 
woman  in  tears.  Having  made  the  remark  to  her  that  her  child 
was  a  very  young  traveller,  she  replied,  that  she  had  not  the 
power  to  dispense  with  the  journey,  for  they  travelled  on  busi- 
ness of  importance  ;  she  also  said  that  she  had  never  had  a  day 
of  happiness  since  she  left  Montreal,  which  was  four  years, 
with  3lr.  Hoyte ;  she  expressed  a  wish  to  go  and  see  her  father. 
She  entreated  me  to  try  and  procure  secretly  clothes  for  her,  for 
3Ir.  Hoyte  wislied  to  dine  wiih  her  in  his  own  room,  in  which 
he  was  then  taking  care  of  the  child.  I  gave  her  my  shawl  and 
bonnet,  and  conchicted  her  secretly  out  by  the  street  St.  Pierre ; 
she  never  rolurned,  and  left  the  child  in  the  hands  of  3Ir.  Hoyte. 
She  sfiid  that  her  hnsljand  was  a  Methodist  preacher,  and  apent 
of  the  Sunday  schools  for  Montreal,  in  which  the  had  resided 
four  months  last  winter;  but  she  had  not  then  been  with  him. 
When  I  returned  to  the  room,  Mr.  Hoyte  was  still  taking  care  of 
the  child ;  he  asked  me  if  1  had  seen  hbf  hdy ;  1  said  no.  Upon 
this  question  he  told  mo  tliat  the  father  oiliis  ladj/  was  dead,  that 
her  mother  yet  hved  in  the  suburbs  of  Quebec,  and  he  asked  mo 
for  all  the  clothes  which  I  had  given  to  wash  for  him,  Am /ody  and 
child ;  clothes  the  ladi/  had  taken  from  the  only  portmanteau 
which  tliey  had.  Beyond  that,  I  perceived  nothing  remarkable, 
except  that  Mr.  Hoyte  wished.to  ccmceal  this  woman,  and  to  pre- 
vent her  from  going  out.  J  heard  the  judge  say  to  him,  "  now  she 
is  yours." 

Sworn  before  me,  the  2d  day 
of  November,  1835.  (Signed)     W.  ROBERTSON 

Marj'^  ^IcCaflfrey,  also  a  chambermaid  in  the  hotel  of  Mr.  Good- 
enough,  corroborates  the  preceding  deposition. 

(Signed)        W.  ROBERTSON 

11* 


126 


H.  K.  Hoytc,  cjiiinol  sulTer  by  the  exposure  of 
his  cohabitation  with  Monk.  He  cannot  suffer 
from  the  exposure  of  his  famiharities  with  Monk, 
practised  even  in  the  presence  of  her  mother. 


No.  33.     Evidence  of  Mrs,  Monk, 

On  this  (lay,  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  October,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  tliirty -five,  before  me,  WilUam  Robertson,  one 
of  his  Majesty's  Justices  of  the  Peace  for  the  district  of  Montreal, 
came  and  appeared  Isabella  Mills,  of  the  city  of  Montreal,  widow 
of  the  late  VviUiam  Monk,  who  declared  that,  wishing  to  guard  the 
public  against  the  deception  wliich  has  lately  been  practised  in 
Montreal  by  designing  mt  n,  who  have  taken  advantage  of  the 
occasional  derangement  of  her  daughter,  to  make  scandalous  ac- 
cusations against  the  Priests  and  Nuns  in  Montreal,  and  after- 
wards to  make  her  pass  herself  for  a  nun  who  had  left  the  con- 
vent. And  after  having  made  oath  on  the  Holy  Evangelists,  (to 
say  the  truth,)  the  said  Isabella  Mills  declares  and  says,  a  man  de- 
cently dressed  (whom  afterwards  I  knew  to  be  W.  K.  Hoyte, 
stating  himself  to  be  a  minister  of  New-York,)  came  to  my  house 
on  or  about  tke  middle  of  August  last,  and  inquired  for  one  Mr. 
Mills ;  that  Mr.  Esson,  a  minister  here,  had  told  him  I  could  give 
some  information  about  that  man  ;  Irephed  that  I  knew  no  one 
of  that  name  in  Montreal,  but  that  I  had  a  brother  of  that  name 
five  miles  out  of  town.  lie  then  told  me  that  he  had  lately  come 
to  3Iontreal,  with  a  young  woman  and  child  of  five  weeks  old ; 
that  the  woman  had  absconded  from  him  at  (j'oodenou^h's  tavern, 
W'here  they  were  lodging,  and  left  him  with  the  child;  he  gave 
me  a  description  of  the  woman  :  I  unfortunately  discovered  that 
the  description  answered  my  daughter,  and  the  reflection  that 
this  stranger  had  called  upon  Mr.  Esson,  our  pastor,  and  inquir- 
ing for  my  brother,  I  suspected  that  this  was  planned ;  I  asked 
for  the  child,  and  said  that  I  would  place  it  in  a  nunnery ;  to  that 
Mr.  Hoyte  started  every  objection,  in  abusive  language,  against 
the  nuns.  At  last  he  consented  to  give  me  the  child,  provided 
I  would  give  my  writing  that  it  should  be  presented  when  de- 
manded. We  left  the  house  together,  Mr.  Hoyte  requesting  me 
to  walk  at  a  distance  from  him,  as  he  was  a  gentleman.  I  foflow- 
od  him  to  3Ir.  dloodenough's  hotel,  and  he  directed  me  to  room 
No.  17,  and  to  demand  the  child  ;  a  servant  maid  gave  it  to  me  ; 
Mr.  Hoyte  came  up,  and  gave  me  tjie  clothing.  I  came  home 
with  the  child,  and  sent  Mrs.  Tarbert,  an  old  acquaintance,  in 
search  of  my  daughter;  her  deposition  will  be  seen.  The  next 
day  Mr.  Hoyte  came  in  with  an  elderly  man,  Dr.  .Judge  Turner, 
decently  dressed,  whom  he  introduced  to  me  as  a  Mr.  Turner  of 


127 


3o^ure  of 
lot  suffer 
h  Monk, 
ler. 


e  thousand 
ertson,  one 
f  Montreal, 
Bal,  widow 
r>  guard  the 
•ractised  in 
ige  of  the 
idalous  ac- 
and  after- 
ft  the  con- 
igelists,  (to 
a  man  de- 
K.  Hoyte, 
my  house 
r  one  Mr. 
pould  give 
w  no  one 
that  name 
tely  come 
eeks  old ; 
's  tavern, 
he  gave 
ered  that 
'tion  that 
id  inquir- 
I  asked 
■ ;  to  that, 
B,  against 
provided 
vhen  de- 
(sting  me 
I  follow- 
to  room 
t  to  me  ; 
le  home 
ance,  in 
^he  next 
Turner, 
urner  of 


St.  Alban's.  They  demanded  to  see  the  cliild,  which  Iproduced. 
Mr.  Hoyte  demanded  if  I  had  discovered  the  mother ;  I  said  not. 
She  must  be  found,  said  he ;  she  has  taken  away  a  shawl  and 
a  bonnet  belonging  to  a  servant  girl  at  Goodenough's ;  he  would 
not  pay  for  them;  she  had  cost  him  too  much  already  ;  that  his 
things  were  kept  at  the  hotel  »n  that  account ;  being  afraid  that 
this  might  more  deeply  involve  mv  daughter,  I  offered  my  own 
shawl  to  replace  the  one  taken ;  5lr.  Hoyte  first  took  it,  but  af- 
terwards returned  it  to  me  on  my  promise  that  I  would  pay  for 
the  shawl  and  bonnet.  In  the  course  of  the  day,  Mrs.  Tarbert 
found  my  daughter,  but  she  would  not  come  to  my  house  ;  she 
sent  the  bonnet  and  shawl,  which  were  returned  to  their  owner, 
who  had  lent  them  to  my  daughter  to  a-ssiist  her  in  procuring  her 
escape  from  Mr,  Hoyte  at  the  hotel.  Karly  on  the  afternoon  of 
the  same  day,  Mr.  JToyte  came  to  my  house  with  the  same  old 
man,  wishing  me  to  make  all  my  ollorts  to  find  the  girl,  in  the 
meantime  speaking  very  bitterly  against  the  CathoHcs,  the  Priests, 
and  the  Nuns ;  mentioning  that  my  daughter  had  been  in  the 
nimnefy,  where  she  had  lj«>on  ill  troated.  I  denied  that  my  daugh- 
ter had  ever  been  i';  a  nunnery  ;  that  wlien  she  was  about  eight 
years  of  age,  she  wont  to  a  day-.school ;  at  that  time  came  in  two 
other  persons,  whom  .Mr.  Hoyte  introduced ;  one  was  the  Rev.  Mr 
Brewster.  I  do  not  recollect  the  other  reverence's  name.  They 
all  requested  me,  in  the  most  prei-sing  terms,  to  try  to  make  it  out 
my  daughter  had  been  in  the  rnmnory ;  and  that  she  had  some 
connexion  with  the  priests  of  the  seminary,  of  which  nunneries 
and  priests  she  spoke  in  the  most  outrageous  terms  ;  said  that 
should  I  make  that  out,  myself,  my  daughter,  and  child  would  be 
protected  for  life.  I  expected  to  get  rid  of  their  importunities,  in 
relating  the  melancholy  circumstances  by  which  my  daughter 
was  frequently  deranged  in  her  head,  and  told  them,  that  when 
at  the  age  of  about  seven  years,  she  broke  a  slate  pencil  in  her 
head  ;  that  sinae  that  time  her  mental  faculties  were  deranged, 
and  by  times  much  more  than  at  other  times,  but  that  she  was 
far  from  being  an  idiot ;  that  she  could  make  the  most  ridiculotis, 
but  most  plausible  stories ;  and  that  as  to  the  history  that  she 
had  been  in  a  nunnery,  it  was  a  fabrication,  for  she  never  was  hi 
a  nunnery  ;  that  at  any  one  time  I  wished  to  obtain  a  place  in  a 
nunnery  for  her,  that  J  had  employed  the  influence  of  Mrs.  De 
Montenach,  of  Dr.  Nelson,  and  of  our  pastor,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Esson, 
but  without  success.  I  told  them  notwithstanding  I  was  a  Pro- 
testant, and  did  not  like  the  Roman  Catholic  religion — like  all 
other  respeetable  protestants,  1  held  the  priests  of  the  seminary 
and  the  nuns  of  3[ontreal  in  veneration,  as  the  most  pious  and 
charitable  per.«ons  I  ever  knew.  After  many  more  solicitations 
to  the  same  effect,  three  of  them  retired,  but  Mr.  Hoyte  remain- 
ed, adding  to  the  other  solicitations ;  he  was  stopped,  c  person 
having  rapped  at  the  door :  it  was  then  candlolignt.  I  opened 
tlie  door,  and  I  fountl  Dr.  M'Donald,  who  told  me  that  my  daugh- 


128 


ter  Maria  was  at  his  house,  in  the  most  distresKing  situation ;  that 
she  wished  him  to  come  and  make  her  peace  with  me  ;  I  went 
with  the  doctor  to  his  house  in  M'Gill  street ;  she  came  with  me 
to  near  my  house,  but  would  not  come  in,  notwithstanding?  I  as- 
sured her  that  she  would  be  kindly  treated,  and  that  I  would  give 
her  her  chilil ;  she  crossed  the  parade-ground,  and  I  went  into  the 
house,  and  returned  for  her.  Mr.  Hoyte  followed  mo.  She  was 
leaning  on  the  west  railing  of  the  parade  ;  wc  went  to  her:  Mr. 
Hoyte  told  her,  my  dear  Mary,  I  am  sorry  yoiihave  treated  yoiir- 
polf  and  me  in  this  manner;  I  hope  you  have  not  exposed  wliat 
has  passed  between  us ;  nevertheless  I  will  treat  you  the  same 
as  ever,  and  spoke  to  her  in  the  most  aflectionate  terms ;  took 
her  in  his  arms  ;  she  at  first  spoke  to  him  very  cross,  and  refused 
to  go  with  him,  but  at  last  consented  and  went  with  him,  abso- 
lutely refusing  to  come  to  my  house.  Soon  after,  Mr.  Hoyte  came 
and  demanded  the  child  ;  1  gave  it  to  him.  Next  morning  Mr. 
Hoyte  returned,  and  was  more  pressing  than  in  his  former  soli- 
citation, and  requested  me  to  say  that  my  daugliter  had  been  in 
the  nunnery  :  that  should  I  say  so,  it  would  be  bettor  than  one 
hundred  pounds  to  me  ;  that  I  would  be  protected  for  life,  and 
that  I  should  leave  Montreal,  and  that  I  weuld  be  better  provided 
for  elsewhere  ;  I  answered  that  thousands  of  pounds  would  not 
induce  me  to  perjure  myself:  then  he  got  saucy  and  abusive  to 
the  utmost;  he  .«aid  he  came  to  Montreal  to  detect  the  infamy  of 
the  Priests  and  the  Nuns ;  that  he  could  not  leave  my  datightcr 
destitute  in  the  wide  world  as  I  had  done  ;  afterwards  said.  No, 
she  is  not  your  daughter,  she  is  too  sensible  for  that,  and  went 
away.  He  was  gone  but  a  few  minutes,  when  Mr.  Doucet,  an 
ancient  magistrate  in  3IontreaI,  came  in.  That  gentleman  told  mo 
thatMr.  Cioodenough  had  just  now  called  upon  him,  and  requested 
him  to  let  me  know  that  I  had  a  daughter  in  Montreal ;  that  she 
had  come  in  with  a  31  r.  Hoyte  and  a  child,  and  that  she  had  left 
Mr.  Hoyte  and  the  child,  but  that  she  was  still  in  Montreal,  so  as 
to  enable  me  to  look  for  lier,  and  that  I  might  prevent  some  mis- 
chief that  was  going  on.  Then  I  related  to  him  partly  what  I 
have  above  said.  When  he  was  going,  two  other  gentlemen  came. 
I  refused  to  give  them  any  information  at  first,  excepting  that  they 
were  of  the  party  that  had  so  much  agitated  me  for  a  few  days ; 
but  being  informed  by  Mr.  Doucet  that  he  knew  one  of  them, 
particularly  Mr.  Perkins,  for  a  respectable  citizen  for  a  long  time 
in  Montreal,  and  the  other,  Mr.  C'urry,  two  ministers  from  the 
United  States,  that  if  they  came  to  obtain  some  information  about 
the  distressing  events  she  related  to  have  occurred  in  her  family, 
he  thought  it  would  do  no  harm,  and  I  related  it  to  them  :  they 
appeared  to  be  afflicted  with  such  a  circumstance ;  I  have  not 
seen  them  any  more.  I  asked  Mr.  Doucet  if  the  man  Hoyte  could 
not  be  put  in  jail ;  he  replied  that  he  thought  not,  for  what  he 
knew  of  the  business.  Then  I  asked  if  the  Priests  were  inform- 
ed of  what  was  going  on;  he  replied,  yes,  but  they  never  take 


1'J9 


ion;  that 
5 ;  I  went 
witli  me 
iing  I  08- 
ould  give 
It  into  ilic 
She  was 
her:  Mr. 
ited  yoiir- 
sed  wliat 
llie  sniuo 
nis;  took 
tl  refuffed 
m,  abso- 
yte  came 
ning  Mr. 
mer  .soli- 
been  in 
than  one 
life,  and 
provided 
ould  not 
)usive  to 
ifamy  of 
laughter 
aid,  No, 
id  went 
iioet,  an 
I  told  mo 
quested 
hat  she 
had  left 
d,  so  as 
Tie  mis- 
what  I 
1  came, 
lat  they 
f  days ; 
'  them, 
ig  time 
)m  the 
about 
family, 
they 
ve  not 
could 
hat  he 
nform- 
take 


up  these  things  ;  they  allow  their  character  to  defond  itself.  A 
few  days  after,  I  heard  that  my  daughter  was  at  on«  Mr.  John- 
son's, a  joiner,  at  Griffin  Town,  with  3Ir.  Hoyte ;  that  he  passed 
her  for  a  nun  that  had  escaped  from  the  Hotel  Dieu  Nunnery.  I 
vent  theietwo  days  successively  with  Mrs.  Tarbert;  the  first 
day  Mrs.  Johnson  denied  her,  and  said,  that  she  was  gone  to  New- 
York  with  Mr.  IToyte.  As  I  was  returning  I  met  Mr.  Hoyte  on 
the  wharf,  and  I  reproached  him  for  his  conduct.  I  told  him  tha« 
my  daughter  had  been  denied  to  me  at  Johnson's,  but  that  I  would, 
have  a  search  warrant  to  have  her  when  I  returned ;  he  had 
really  gone  with  my  unfortunate  daughter  ;  and  I  received  from 
Mr.  Johnson,  his  wife,  and  a  number  of  persons  in  their  house, 
the  grossest  abuse,  mixed  with  texts  of  the  Gospel,  Mr.  Johnson 
bringing  a  Bible  for  me  to  swear  on.  I  retired  more  deeply  af- 
flicted than  ever,  and  further  sayeth  not. 
Sworn  before  me,  this  '2  Jth  of 
October,  1835. 

W.  ROBERTSON,  J.  P. 

We  are  informed  that  Mrs,  Monk's  evidence  on 
the  Juaterial  question  of  her  daughter's  residence  in 
the  Hotel  Dieu  Convent  has  been  disputed  on  some 
unimaginable  ground  of  interest  and  secret  influ- 
ence. It  is  unnecessary  to  draw  comparisons  be- 
tween Mrs.  Monk  and  her  unhappy  dauf^hter ;  but 
wc  are  bound  to  state,  that  in  her  situation  in  life 
Mrs.  Monk  is  regarded  and  esteemed.  Her  good 
conduct  and  management  at  the  government  house 
has  secured  to  her,  for  many  years,  a  situation  of 
trust,  and  will  continue  to  secure  to  her  a  decent 
subsistence  to  the  end  of  her  days.  The  attempt 
made  to  bribe  Mrs.  Monk  was  repeated  in  regard 
to  other  persons.  M'ss  Louise  Bousquot  of  St. 
Denis,  was  induced  to  visit  Montreal  on  a  false  in- 
ducement, which  the  parties  were  frightened  from 
following  up  by  an  explanation  of  their  real  inten- 
tions. The  evidence  of  Miss  Bousquet  (No.  5), 
refers  to  Ambrose  Vigeaut. 


130 


No.  34.     Evidence  of  Amhroise  Vigeaut, 

Province  of  Lower  Canada  : 

This  twenty-sixth  day  of  July,  eichtcen  hundred  and  thirty- 
six,  appeared  bewre  me,  Hoiijamiii  Holmep,  one  of  his  Majesty's 
Justices  of  the  Pence  for  the  District  of  3Iontreal,  Ambroise  Vi- 
gaut,  who,  having  been  sworn  on  the  IJoIyEvangehsts,  declared  : 

That  deponent  had  attended  a  school  kept  by  tlie  so-called  Ma- 
ria Monk  at  St.  Denis,  for  the  space  of  about  two  months,  in  the 
year  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-three  ;  that  vv  hilst  deponent  at- 
tended her  school,  she  kept  it  at  two  diflerent  places  ;  first  in  the 
house  of  Michael  Guertin,  farmer,  and  subsequently  in  the  house 
of  Jean  Baptiste  Laflammc  ditTimineur;  that  previously  to  his 
attendance  at  said  school,  deponent  had  understood  that  the  said 
Maria  had  resided  at  St.  Denis  and  in  llie  neighborhood  for  se- 
veral months ;  that  subsequently  to  his  departure  from  the  said 
school,  he  had  understood  that  the  said  IMaria  remained  residing 
in  and  about  St.  Denis  for  several  months :  and  deponent  further 
particularly  declared  that  he  saw  the  said  Maria  at  St.  Denis  on 
the  twenty-ninth  day  of  June,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
thirty-four,  bein^  the  day  on  which  my  lord  the  bishop  of  Tel- 
messe  there  administered  confirmation;  and  deponent  further  de- 
clared, that  in  the  summer  of  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-five, 
the  said  Maria,  accompanied  by  a  man  whose  name  is  unknown 
to  deponent,  came  to  the  bar  of  PhiUp  Lavoiel,  tavern  keeper,  re- 
siding in  the  main  street  of  the  St.  Lawrence  suburbs,  city  of  Mon- 
treal, where  deponent  w-as  employed ;  that  the  said  Maria  and  the 
said  man  having  conversed  for  a  long  time  together,  the  said  Ma- 
ria requested  deponent  to  write  to  5liss  Louise  Bousquet  of  St. 
Denis,  and  say  to  her  on  behalf  of  the  said  3Iaria,  that  the  »aid  Ma- 
ria had  two  hundred  pounds  eurrency  to  give  her,  and  that  she  in- 
vited her  to  come  to  town  to  receive  them  ;  that  at  the  second  visit 
to  deponent  of  the  said  Maria,  accompanied  as  aforesaid,  the  said 
letter  was  written ;  that  the  man  who  accompanied  the  said  Maria 
was  dressed  in  black  cloth ;  that  some  time  thereafter  the  said 
Louise  Bousquet  called  on  deponent,  and  that  deponent  was  only 
nble  to  inform  her  that  the  said  letter  w  as  written  at  the  request  of 
the  said  Maria ;  and  deponent  further  declared,  that  he  had  never 
understood  that  the  said  Maria  had  been  an  inmate  of  any  convent 
or  reHgious  establishment  in  Canada ;  and  deponent  further  de- 
clared not. 

AMBROISE  VIGEAUT. 

Sworn  before  me,  at  Montreal,  this  26th 
day  of  July,  1836. 

BENJ.  HOLMES,  J.  P. 

The  associates,  defeatod  in  their  attempts  to  su- 
born witnesses,  defeated  in   their  expectation  of 


131 

Protestant  illiberality  in  Canada,  departed    from 
it. 

The  admirable,  noble,  and  generous  conduct  of 
the  Protestants  of  Lower  Canada,  in  relation  to 
these  « Awful  Disclosures,"  is  an  example  to  all 
nations  and  all  communities.  Each  man  pressed 
forward  with  his  unsolicited  testimony  in  the  causo 
of  insulted  virtue  ;  the  press  echoed  the  public  voice, 
and  m  accents  of  deep  and  eloquent  indignation, 
reprobated  the  unapproachable  infamy  ol,  «  We,  the 
Subscribers." 

The  act  of  accusation,  brought  by  "  We,  the  Sub- 
scribers," against  the  priests  and  nuns  of  Lower 
Canada,  recalls  the  proceedings  of  the  Gallican 
revolutionary  assassins  on  tiie  trial  of  Marie  Antoi- 
nette. When  that  persecuted  princess  was  charg- 
ed before  a  flmatical  tribunal  with  an  impossible 
crime,  she  turned  from  the  tigers  to  her  fellow- 
creatures,  and  exclaimed,  "  I  appeal  to  the  hearts  of 
mothers." 


THE  END. 


